Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 06:58:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <691df959-9156-4ac7-8916-4556f322782b@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <516E715C.9040502@gmx.de>
References: <CAOQ8VDU1FdpZXmVOXT9zPS1kxOHQxd_4LSpUOn_Yp1k2qwytHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <516E715C.9040502@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Forethought Tanru-Internal TAG Connectives
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_37_175068.1366207085002"
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_37_175068.1366207085002
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1


On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 1:54:36 PM UTC+4, selpa'i wrote:
>
> la tsani cu cusku di'e 
> > I'll get straight to the point: they don't exist. 
>
> In general, there is a lack of forethought TAG connectives [1]. You can 
> say {TAG gi broda gi brode}, but not *{ge BAI gi/bo? broda gi brode}, 
> although you can do it with afterthoughts: {broda gi'e TAG bo brode}. 
> And then there the reverse also doesn't work; that is, TAG afterthoughts 
> without logical connectives like *{ko'a bai bo ko'e}. 
>
> Also, the current parsers don't like {ge broda gi ba bo brode}. 
>
> > The lack of consistency annoys me, as I'm sure it does others, too. It's 
> > part of what makes me in favour of the connective reform involving such 
> > things as {gije} as a replacement for {gi'e}, which would equally 
> > provide us with a means for producing non-logical bridi-tail 
> > afterthought connectives. 
>
> That makes us at least four or five then. 
>

ja'o ei ciska lo cnino me cylyly gijenai casnu do'e lo mriste 
i da'i ma ba te vecnu lo pelji me cylyly pe ra'i la'oi docbook i ainai mi 
te vecnu lo pelji co'e
iseni'ibo na nitcu lo simsa cukta i lo uitki me cylyly ba banzu


> > P.S. It occurred to me that they didn't exist when I tried translating 
> > "We do what we must because we can" as *{.i zukte lo semu'igi se bilga 
> > gi se zifre}, but {TAGgi} only works for non-tanru-internal forethought 
> > connectives. 
>
> Do you want a forethought version of {lo se bilga je mu'i bo se bilga} 
> or one without the logical connective? I think both should be allowed to 
> exist, but currently neither does. 
>
> (Under GIJA) would something like {se mu'i gu broda gi brode} work? As a 
> reminder, GU would be the GI of tanru forethoughts (GUJA replacing GUhA). 
>
> > Using {zukte semu'igi lo se bilga gi lo se zifre} is out of 
> > the question because the meaning is different. I want to get at the 
> > meaning of "we do the (things that we must do because we can do them)" 
> > rather than "(we do the things that we must do) (because we can do 
> > them)." In sum, the fact that these types of connectives don't exist 
> > is frustrating and inconsistent and should be fixed in order for the 
> > language to be in accordance with its philosophy. 
>
> Amen. 
>
> mu'o mi'e la selpa'i 
>
> [1] This table (from CLL Chapter 14, Section 20) clearly shows that 
> forethoughts don't come with TAG support: 
>
>    construct   afterth. foreth.  afterth.  foreth. 
>                      logical  logical  non-log.  non-log. 
>      ---------   -------  -------  --------  -------- 
>
>      bridi       ijek*    gek     ijoik*     joigik 
>      sumti       ek*      gek     joik*      joigik 
>      bridi-tails gihek*   gek     ---        joigik 
>      termsets    ek*      gek     joik*      joigik 
>      tanru parts jek      guhek   joik*      --- 
>      operands    ek*      gek     joik*      joigik 
>      operators   jek      guhek   joik       --- 
>      tenses/modals   jek      ---     joik       --- 
>      abstractors jek      ---     joik       --- 
>
> An asterisk (*) indicates that tensed connection is permitted. 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


------=_Part_37_175068.1366207085002
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br>On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 1:54:36 PM UTC+4, selpa'i wrote:<block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-le=
ft: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">la tsani cu cusku di'e
<br>&gt; I'll get straight to the point: they don't exist.
<br>
<br>In general, there is a lack of forethought TAG connectives [1]. You can=
=20
<br>say {TAG gi broda gi brode}, but not *{ge BAI gi/bo? broda gi brode},=
=20
<br>although you can do it with afterthoughts: {broda gi'e TAG bo brode}.=
=20
<br>And then there the reverse also doesn't work; that is, TAG afterthought=
s=20
<br>without logical connectives like *{ko'a bai bo ko'e}.
<br>
<br>Also, the current parsers don't like {ge broda gi ba bo brode}.
<br>
<br>&gt; The lack of consistency annoys me, as I'm sure it does others, too=
. It's
<br>&gt; part of what makes me in favour of the connective reform involving=
 such
<br>&gt; things as {gije} as a replacement for {gi'e}, which would equally
<br>&gt; provide us with a means for producing non-logical bridi-tail
<br>&gt; afterthought connectives.
<br>
<br>That makes us at least four or five then.
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>ja'o ei ciska lo cnino me cylyly gijen=
ai casnu do'e lo mriste&nbsp;</div><div>i da'i ma ba te vecnu lo pelji me c=
ylyly pe ra'i la'oi docbook i ainai mi te vecnu lo pelji co'e</div><div>ise=
ni'ibo na nitcu lo simsa cukta i lo uitki me cylyly ba banzu</div><div><br>=
</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;m=
argin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>&gt; P.S. It occurred to me that they didn't exist when I tried transla=
ting
<br>&gt; "We do what we must because we can" as *{.i zukte lo semu'igi se b=
ilga
<br>&gt; gi se zifre}, but {TAGgi} only works for non-tanru-internal foreth=
ought
<br>&gt; connectives.
<br>
<br>Do you want a forethought version of {lo se bilga je mu'i bo se bilga}=
=20
<br>or one without the logical connective? I think both should be allowed t=
o=20
<br>exist, but currently neither does.
<br>
<br>(Under GIJA) would something like {se mu'i gu broda gi brode} work? As =
a=20
<br>reminder, GU would be the GI of tanru forethoughts (GUJA replacing GUhA=
).
<br>
<br>&gt; Using {zukte semu'igi lo se bilga gi lo se zifre} is out of
<br>&gt; the question because the meaning is different. I want to get at th=
e
<br>&gt; meaning of "we do the (things that we must do because we can do th=
em)"
<br>&gt; rather than "(we do the things that we must do) (because we can do
<br>&gt; them)." In sum, the fact that these types of connectives don't exi=
st
<br>&gt; is frustrating and inconsistent and should be fixed in order for t=
he
<br>&gt; language to be in accordance with its philosophy.
<br>
<br>Amen.
<br>
<br>mu'o mi'e la selpa'i
<br>
<br>[1] This table (from CLL Chapter 14, Section 20) clearly shows that=20
<br>forethoughts don't come with TAG support:
<br>
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp;construct &nbsp; afterth. foreth. &nbsp;afterth. &nbsp;for=
eth.
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &=
nbsp;logical &nbsp;logical &nbsp;non-log. &nbsp;non-log.
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;--------- &nbsp; ------- &nbsp;------- &nbsp;------=
-- &nbsp;--------
<br>
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;bridi &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ijek* &nbsp; &nbsp;gek &=
nbsp; &nbsp; ijoik* &nbsp; &nbsp; joigik
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;sumti &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ek* &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;=
gek &nbsp; &nbsp; joik* &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;joigik
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;bridi-tails gihek* &nbsp; gek &nbsp; &nbsp; --- &nb=
sp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;joigik
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;termsets &nbsp; &nbsp;ek* &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;gek &=
nbsp; &nbsp; joik* &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;joigik
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;tanru parts jek &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;guhek &nbsp; jo=
ik* &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;---
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;operands &nbsp; &nbsp;ek* &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;gek &=
nbsp; &nbsp; joik* &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;joigik
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;operators &nbsp; jek &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;guhek &nbs=
p; joik &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ---
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;tenses/modals &nbsp; jek &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;--- &n=
bsp; &nbsp; joik &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ---
<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;abstractors jek &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;--- &nbsp; &nbs=
p; joik &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; ---
<br>
<br>An asterisk (*) indicates that tensed connection is permitted.
<br></blockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3De=
n">http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out=
">https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_37_175068.1366207085002--