Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22b as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22b;
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2014 14:03:23 -0300
Message-ID: <CAO7tK2cvDQHU6Occ6rHFGMmnf+GaA9x7GdhxainF=KwgSmuDnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [lojban] On sumti raising
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
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=001a11c245448e131b04fb5612fd
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

--001a11c245448e131b04fb5612fd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I want to talk about possession and transfer predicates, but first I need
to make a digression on the issue of raising. As so often happens with
Lojban, the notion of "sumti raising" we inherited from Lojbanic lore is
only vaguely related to the notion of raising as understood in linguistics,
so it's worth looking into it first:

"In linguistics, raising is the construction where a given predicate/verb
takes a dependent that is not its semantic argument, but rather it is the
semantic argument of an embedded predicate. In other words, an argument
that belongs to an embedded predicate is realized syntactically as a
dependent of a higher predicate/verb. Not all languages have raising
predicates, but English is one that does."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_(linguistics)

We might add that Lojban is another language that has raising, much like
English. Examples of raising verbs in English are:

 Tom seems to have won the race.
 That proves Susan to be a jakass.

In the first example Tom is raised to subject of "seem" (compare with "it
seems that Tom has won the race"), in the second case "Susan" is raised to
object (compare with "that proves that Susan is a jackass".

Raising predicates can be contrasted with control predicates that have some
features in common, but in which the argument syntactically selected by the
higher predicate is also semantically selected. Compare the bahavior of the
raising verb "want" with the behavior of the control verb "tell":

Susan wants John to write the letter.
Susan wants the letter to be written by John.
Susan wants that John write the letter.

Susan tells John to write the letter.
?Susan tells the letter to be written by John.
*Susan tells that John write the letter.

In the case of the raising verb "want", all three sentences mean basically
the same thing, "want" doesn't assign any special semantic significance to
the raised argument. In the case of the control verb "ask" the meanings are
completely different.

In any case, the difference between raising and control predicates is not
my main concern. My main concern is the difference between raising and
something completely different, which is this:

Susan wants chocolate.
Susan wants to eat chocolate.

That is NOT an example of raising in the linguistic sense. In "Susan wants
chocolate" there is no raising involved, chocolate is just what Susan
wants, Compare with "Susan wants John to write the letter", where John is
not what Susan wants, but it is raised from the subordinate clause that
describes what Susan wants.

Lojban has many raising predicates. "simlu" is the obvious one
corresponding to English "seems". We can see that it's a raising predicate
with these transformations:

la djan cu simlu lo ka ce'u dunda lo tinba la meris
lo tinba cu simlu lo ka la djan dunda ce'u la meris
la meris cu simlu lo ka la djan dunda lo tinba ce'u
lo du'u la djan cu dunda lo tinba la meris cu simlu lo ka ce'u fatci

which all mean basically the same thing. The predicate "simlu" raises an
argument from x2 into x1 to put it in focus, but not with much semantic
significance.

All predicates in Lojban that have a property place and a place for the
thing with the property are candidates to be sumti raising predicates or
control predicates. If it makes little or no semantic difference which
argument from the subordinate property is raised as a syntactic argument of
the superordinate predicate (as in "simlu"), then it's a sumti raising
predicate. If it makes an important difference which argument is selected,
then it's a control predicate (for example "minde").

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--001a11c245448e131b04fb5612fd
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><span style=3D"color:rgb(37,37,37);font-family:sans-s=
erif;line-height:22.399999618530273px">I want to talk about possession and =
transfer predicates, but first I need to make a digression on the issue of =
raising. As so often happens with Lojban, the notion of &quot;sumti raising=
&quot; we inherited from Lojbanic lore is only vaguely related to the notio=
n of raising as understood in linguistics, so it&#39;s worth looking into i=
t first:</span></div>

<div><span style=3D"color:rgb(37,37,37);font-family:sans-serif;line-height:=
22.399999618530273px"><br></span></div>&quot;In linguistics, raising is the=
 construction where a given predicate/verb takes a dependent that is not it=
s semantic argument, but rather it is the semantic argument of an embedded =
predicate. In other words, an argument that belongs to an embedded predicat=
e is realized syntactically as a dependent of a higher predicate/verb. Not =
all languages have raising predicates, but English is one that does.&quot; =
<a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_(linguistics)" target=3D"_b=
lank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_(linguistics)</a><br>


<div><br></div><div>We might add that Lojban is another language that has r=
aising, much like English. Examples of raising verbs in English are:</div><=
div><br></div><div>=C2=A0Tom seems to have won the race.</div>
<div>=C2=A0That proves Susan to be a jakass.</div><div><br></div><div>In th=
e first example Tom is raised to subject of &quot;seem&quot; (compare with =
&quot;it seems that Tom has won the race&quot;), in the second case &quot;S=
usan&quot; is raised to object (compare with &quot;that proves that Susan i=
s a jackass&quot;.</div>

<div><br></div><div>Raising predicates can be contrasted with control predi=
cates that have some features in common, but in which the argument syntacti=
cally selected by the higher predicate is also semantically selected. Compa=
re the bahavior of the raising verb &quot;want&quot; with the behavior of t=
he control verb &quot;tell&quot;:</div>

<div><br></div><div>Susan wants John to write the letter.</div><div>Susan w=
ants the letter to be written by John.</div><div>Susan wants that John writ=
e the letter.</div><div><br></div><div>Susan tells John to write the letter=
.</div>

<div>?Susan tells the letter to be written by John.</div><div>*Susan tells =
that John write the letter.</div><div><br></div><div>In the case of the rai=
sing verb &quot;want&quot;, all three sentences mean basically the same thi=
ng, &quot;want&quot; doesn&#39;t assign any special semantic significance t=
o the raised argument. In the case of the control verb &quot;ask&quot; the =
meanings are completely different.</div>

<div><br></div><div>In any case, the difference between raising and control=
 predicates is not my main concern. My main concern is the difference betwe=
en raising and something completely different, which is this:</div><div>

<br></div><div>Susan wants chocolate.</div><div>Susan wants to eat chocolat=
e.</div><div><br></div><div>That is NOT an example of raising in the lingui=
stic sense. In &quot;Susan wants chocolate&quot; there is no raising involv=
ed, chocolate is just what Susan wants, Compare with &quot;Susan wants John=
 to write the letter&quot;, where John is not what Susan wants, but it is r=
aised from the subordinate clause that describes what Susan wants.=C2=A0</d=
iv>
<div><br></div><div>Lojban has many raising predicates. &quot;simlu&quot; i=
s the obvious one corresponding to English &quot;seems&quot;. We can see th=
at it&#39;s a raising predicate with these transformations:</div><div><br>
</div><div>la djan cu simlu lo ka ce&#39;u dunda lo tinba la meris</div><di=
v>lo tinba cu simlu lo ka la djan dunda ce&#39;u la meris</div><div>la meri=
s cu simlu lo ka la djan dunda lo tinba ce&#39;u</div><div>lo du&#39;u la d=
jan cu dunda lo tinba la meris cu simlu lo ka ce&#39;u fatci</div>
<div><br></div><div>which all mean basically the same thing. The predicate =
&quot;simlu&quot; raises an argument from x2 into x1 to put it in focus, bu=
t not with much semantic significance.</div><div><br></div><div>All predica=
tes in Lojban that have a property place and a place for the thing with the=
 property are candidates to be sumti raising predicates or control predicat=
es. If it makes little or no semantic difference which argument from the su=
bordinate property is raised as a syntactic argument of the superordinate p=
redicate (as in &quot;simlu&quot;), then it&#39;s a sumti raising predicate=
. If it makes an important difference which argument is selected, then it&#=
39;s a control predicate (for example &quot;minde&quot;).</div>
<div><br></div><div>mu&#39;o mi&#39;e xorxes=C2=A0</div><div><br></div></di=
v>

<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 <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

--001a11c245448e131b04fb5612fd--