Received: from mail-la0-f59.google.com ([209.85.215.59]:58407) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XcvJt-000160-0e for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 04:58:53 -0700 Received: by mail-la0-f59.google.com with SMTP id gi9sf457446lab.14 for ; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 04:58:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=guqj3L8Xpp1rH6mFT/GhvnpXDTvnae85VxtEGXtx5Gg=; b=xbhTPovtsdaaJuW0z9zGMTvCxbvSKUml6OHlTDBrAzUtx67AQa7fSC/FyJiUwr3Iu/ fSo5RpcqltfnrGfR8UttJdBkJ3+dUilAZ6s1be22TwQeBUsC8Bjs9NICa8+j/kgb3X9e cgfKzhrJ6nUg4IZIJU5OtH79/LPfMxNi5s1/Bz7DEg0pM3XutB1LBMUUbJSi4xb/yh5G tP8kIkY37AtKKHojirNlZqTv5VAzLJ3qqfnhHckOfHpB3gtYpl9HQHhGXiKxvRevEGeo BQfOCMpDhOYEhTbLxt7oigSPvJU2yLB1nfeCtU2HHAzDm7HrTUm/c9GBPdWup/AnOof7 XajQ== X-Received: by 10.180.90.174 with SMTP id bx14mr68687wib.20.1413028717720; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 04:58:37 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.88.8 with SMTP id bc8ls257667wib.22.gmail; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 04:58:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.180.109.67 with SMTP id hq3mr655916wib.1.1413028717279; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 04:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x22e.google.com (mail-la0-x22e.google.com [2a00:1450:4010:c03::22e]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id rb5si71920lbb.0.2014.10.11.04.58.37 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 11 Oct 2014 04:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c03::22e as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c03::22e; Received: by mail-la0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id gi9so4629122lab.19 for ; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 04:58:37 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.161.70 with SMTP id xq6mr10747872lbb.49.1413028717158; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 04:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.61.107 with HTTP; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 04:58:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20141011021201.GH22868@gonzales> References: <20141006025048.GE1974@gonzales> <20141008015245.GB17866@gonzales> <20141009010533.GF18854@gonzales> <20141009233031.GC1592@gonzales> <20141010234033.GG22868@gonzales> <20141011021201.GH22868@gonzales> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 08:58:36 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: tersmu 0.2 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c03::22e as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c25944be685b0505246264 X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - --001a11c25944be685b0505246264 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Martin Bays wrote: > * Friday, 2014-10-10 at 22:03 -0300 - Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas >: > > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Martin Bays wrote: > > > > The need for opaque contexts was the main reason for "tu'a" to exist, s= o > > you could say "mi nitcu tu'a su'o mikce" without claiming that there's = a > > doctor such that you need them. > > I see. Just to check - there's no corresponding special behaviour for > {jai}, right? > ro da jai broda > -> ro da zo'u tu'a da broda > ? > Right, "jai" raises an argument place out of a subordinate clause up to the main clause, while "tu'a" buries its argument into a subordinate clause. But "jai" deals with argument places, while "tu'a" deals with arguments. > Argh. Then yes, it looks like {tu'a} is in LAhE only syntactically, not > semantically, and must be handled separately. > For non-condensed forms (by "condensed form" I mean those forms that use a bridi operator in an argument position) "tu'a" behaves like the other LAhEs. It's the condensed forms that need special treatment, because "tu'a" introduces an additional level of subordinate clause. (So then tu'a needing opacity is no longer an argument that the rest of > LAhE should get it...) > Well... But a concrete test question to narrow things down: > > is {lo broda ku du lo broda} always true for all broda, as long as we > ignore any possible issues about unfilled places and/or variable vague > tenses etc? > I would most likely interpret it as true (emphasis on "interpret"). I don't think it's a syntactic rule though, but then again maybe that's just because it's so hard to abstract away from unfilled places, tenses, etc. Similarly, is > lo bakni ku catlu gi'e damba > <=3D> lo bakni ku catlu i je lo bakni ku damba > legitimate (under the same assumptions)? > I would say no, but again that may be only because those assumptions may never be actually fulfilled. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=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. --001a11c25944be685b0505246264 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wr= ote:
* Friday, 2014-10-10 at 22:03 -0300 = - Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <jjllambia= s@gmail.com>:

> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
>
> The need for opaque contexts was the main reas= on for "tu'a" to exist, so
> you could say "mi nitcu tu'a su'o mikce" without cla= iming that there's a
> doctor such that you need them.

I see. Just to check - there's no corresponding special behaviou= r for
{jai}, right?
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 ro da jai broda
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 -> ro da zo'u tu'a da broda
?

Right, "= jai" raises an argument place out of a subordinate clause up to the ma= in clause, while "tu'a" buries its argument into a subordinat= e clause. But "jai" deals with argument places, while "tu= 9;a" deals with arguments.

=C2=A0
Argh. Then yes, it looks like {tu'a} is in LAhE only syntactical= ly, not
semantically, and must be handled separately.

For non-condensed forms (by "condensed form" I mean those = forms that use a bridi operator in an argument position) "tu'a&quo= t; behaves like the other LAhEs. It's the condensed forms that need spe= cial treatment, because "tu'a" introduces an additional level= of subordinate clause.=C2=A0

(So then tu'a needing opacity is no longer an argument that the rest of=
LAhE should get it...)

Well...



But a concrete test question to narrow things down:

is {lo broda ku du lo broda} always true for all broda, as long as we
ignore any possible issues about unfilled places and/or variable vague
tenses etc?

I would most likely interpr= et it as true (emphasis on "interpret"). I don't think it'= ;s a syntactic rule though, but then again maybe that's just because it= 's so hard to abstract away from unfilled places, tenses, etc. =C2=A0

Similarly, is
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 lo bakni ku catlu gi'e damba
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 <=3D> lo bakni ku catlu i je lo bakni ku damba
legitimate (under the same assumptions)?

I would say no, but again that may be only because those assumptions may = never be actually fulfilled.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

<= /div>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsub= scribe@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 http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--001a11c25944be685b0505246264--