Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of and.rosta@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400e:c02::235 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400e:c02::235;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2csEZWF3QqXMW7dnVx28yCt6GWe60buRHMSd5t1yyXSaw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b15b8cb4-2f0f-45e4-b630-6480ed7d4654@googlegroups.com>
	<CAO7tK2f76zV9SD36y4sNaAc+rAx_h6VYpyumgwPTYu43urOfJQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPkzLyky2YMQfW-JF-tk+7b_LwMt6bwngZTBwym-1ov=vg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2d+jG=uYH4Z+mMuW=CRmH=XnDSH0wZQBfgaguYDi97LPQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACf3dPkmVs-vhaPMq1Gp23ze8hg3fmdDw-D8WurzCY4e8zPLwg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO7tK2csEZWF3QqXMW7dnVx28yCt6GWe60buRHMSd5t1yyXSaw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 16:33:26 +0100
Message-ID: <CACf3dPnyQjbJzJfZUxZ8RgaXq0MiKVK_KFv53nYwBCzDj-MuzA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Speaker specificity: {.i da'i na vajni}
From: And Rosta <and.rosta@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=001a11332ca40d78ae050421df00
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

--001a11332ca40d78ae050421df00
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 28 Sep 2014 01:43, "Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas" <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 7:43 PM, And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 27 Sep 2014 20:28, "Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas" <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote=
:
>> >
>> >
>> > Is that just adding non-veridicality to "lo", or something else to do
with specificity?
>>
>> The specificity comes from the {co'e}.
>
> Even if "co'e" is some specific predicate that the speaker has in mind, I
don't think "lo co'e" has to have specific referents, since any predicate
could have non specific referents.

I don't know what having "nonspecific referents" is. If a specific referent
is one underdetermined by the description, is a nonspecific one one that is
fully determined by the description, e.g. a generic?

> Maybe "co'e" is meant to stand for the predicate "x1 is/are certain x2".

"x1 is a certain thing" would do as a gloss.

>> I had misremembered {voi}. I mean rather that {le broda} is {lo co'e
voi'i ke'a broda}, where {voi'i} is nonveridical {noi} (I haven't found an
existing experimental cmavo for that in jbovlaste, but I may have searched
with insufficient diligence). {Voi} itself seems utterly useless: has it
ever been used correctly and meaningfully?
>
> I don't think it has seen much use at all. I'm sure the irci boys will
soon find a better use for it since they seem to be re-purposing all those
wasted one syllable cmavo like "tau", "lau" and such.

I would go for du'u, ke'a, ce'u, zo'u, zo'e, co'e, poi'i (which I'm amazed
to see lives), su'o(i), mu'ei to be monosyllabic. Do the irci boys have a
list of ideas?

>> The nonveridicality is a natural consequence of the identificatory
function of the relative clause.
>>
>> In other words, {le} is specificity (co'e) plus identificatory clause
(voi'i).
>
> I think I would rather have a predicate that meant "certain" instead of a
gadri for specificity. Or at least we could define "le" in terms of that
predicate.

{le} might or might not be a worthwhile abbreviation for {lo co'e voi'i},
but that's what it does seem to be an abbreviation of, so is not mysterious
as to its meaning. I don't know about lei or le'i or le'e -- all those
lV(')V gadri should, as Nick Nicholas would say, die in the arse.

--And.

--=20
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 e=
mail 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.

--001a11332ca40d78ae050421df00
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p dir=3D"ltr"><br>
On 28 Sep 2014 01:43, &quot;Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto=
:jjllambias@gmail.com">jjllambias@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 7:43 PM, And Rosta &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:and.r=
osta@gmail.com">and.rosta@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; On 27 Sep 2014 20:28, &quot;Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas&quot; &lt;<a href=
=3D"mailto:jjllambias@gmail.com">jjllambias@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; &gt; Is that just adding non-veridicality to &quot;lo&quot;, or so=
mething else to do with specificity?<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; The specificity comes from the {co&#39;e}.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Even if &quot;co&#39;e&quot; is some specific predicate that the speak=
er has in mind, I don&#39;t think &quot;lo co&#39;e&quot; has to have speci=
fic referents, since any predicate could have non specific referents.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">I don&#39;t know what having &quot;nonspecific referents&quo=
t; is. If a specific referent is one underdetermined by the description, is=
 a nonspecific one one that is fully determined by the description, e.g. a =
generic?</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">&gt; Maybe &quot;co&#39;e&quot; is meant to stand for the pr=
edicate &quot;x1 is/are certain x2&quot;.=C2=A0</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">&quot;x1 is a certain thing&quot; would do as a gloss.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">&gt;&gt; I had misremembered {voi}. I mean rather that {le b=
roda} is {lo co&#39;e voi&#39;i ke&#39;a broda}, where {voi&#39;i} is nonve=
ridical {noi} (I haven&#39;t found an existing experimental cmavo for that =
in jbovlaste, but I may have searched with insufficient diligence). {Voi} i=
tself seems utterly useless: has it ever been used correctly and meaningful=
ly?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I don&#39;t think it has seen much use at all. I&#39;m sure the irci b=
oys will soon find a better use for it since they seem to be re-purposing a=
ll those wasted one syllable cmavo like &quot;tau&quot;, &quot;lau&quot; an=
d such.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">I would go for du&#39;u, ke&#39;a, ce&#39;u, zo&#39;u, zo=
9;e, co&#39;e, poi&#39;i (which I&#39;m amazed to see lives), su&#39;o(i), =
mu&#39;ei to be monosyllabic. Do the irci boys have a list of ideas?</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">&gt;&gt; The nonveridicality is a natural consequence of the=
 identificatory function of the relative clause.<br>
&gt;&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; In other words, {le} is specificity (co&#39;e) plus identificatory=
 clause (voi&#39;i).<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I think I would rather have a predicate that meant &quot;certain&quot;=
 instead of a gadri for specificity. Or at least we could define &quot;le&q=
uot; in terms of that predicate.</p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">{le} might or might not be a worthwhile abbreviation for {lo=
 co&#39;e voi&#39;i}, but that&#39;s what it does seem to be an abbreviatio=
n of, so is not mysterious as to its meaning. I don&#39;t know about lei or=
 le&#39;i or le&#39;e -- all those lV(&#39;)V gadri should, as Nick Nichola=
s would say, die in the arse. </p>
<p dir=3D"ltr">--And.</p>

<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 />

--001a11332ca40d78ae050421df00--