From cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!LOJBAN Sat Oct 5 12:22:59 1991 Return-Path: Date: Sat Oct 5 12:22:59 1991 Message-Id: <9110051607.AA12512@relay1.UU.NET> Reply-To: cbmvax!uunet!gnu.ai.mit.edu!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!bob Sender: Lojban list Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was bob@GRACKLE.STOCKBRIDGE.MA.US From: cbmvax!uunet!GNU.AI.MIT.EDU!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!bob Subject: auto-insertion or VSO X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan , Eric Raymond , Eric Tiedemann Status: RO Here is a discussion of the suggestions concerning Verb-Subject-Object order and inserting previous sumti in empty places. The auto-insertion suggestion comes from Jim Carter. I should say that I may have misunderstood him. I find it almost impossible to read Jim Carter's postings. They are too complex for me. Jim presumes his readers are intelligent and cooperative. I am intelligent, but not cooperative. As a practical matter, I lack the vitality and the time to be cooperative. I need to be spoon fed succinct chunks, otherwise I skip the feast. Anyhow, here is my understanding of this recent discussion: 1. The purpose of the observative is to make the following grammatical: farlu Falls. This is the sort of sentence learners often say. 2. Next, observe to where the fall occurs: farlu be le loldi Falls to the (specific) floor (that I have in mind). 3. The first question is, should farlu be le loldi Falls to the (specific) floor (that I have in mind). mean the same as farlu le loldi or should the latter mean, `The floor falls.', using a VSO grammar? To me, the `The floor falls.' interpretation is very vivid: when I was in third grade a part of the floor of the classroom fell into the room below. [No one was hurt; we spent the next few weeks in that class room with the hole roped off and passed notes to the kids below when the teacher wasn't looking. I doubt that contemporary school administrators would be so casual.] 3a. In current lojban, `farlu le loldi' means `falls to the floor' You need to say `farlu fa le loldi' to mean, `The floor falls (to someplace unspecified) (from someplace unspecified).' 4. The next question concerns the subject of abstractions: Suppose you see me putting wedges under the legs of a wobbly table. You ask what I am doing. I might say: naku mi djica It is false that I desire the event of falling to the floor The sentence omits the faller. I may be referring to a vase or to pencils that role off the table. However, in another context, I may be referring to myself: I may want to climb on the table to fix a light. Lojban allows this ambiguity; you can specify the subject if you wish. (Yea, I know I am supposed to climb on a stool or step ladder to fix the light; but I don't, unless one is nearby.) 5. Should the grammar be changed. Here are two suggestions: 5a. James Carter suggests replicating the previous sumti. In this case, when you hear the sentence you automatically and effortlessly insert the most recent sumti previous to the abstract clause in the unmarked place of the abstract clause: naku mi djica It is false that I desire the event of me falling to the floor (Side note: I said "you automatically and effortlessly insert the sumti" to emphasize a characteristic of grammatical constructs that people use, which is that humans deal with them without conscious effort or thought, in contrast to semantic constructs. For example, I effortlessly put tense and number into the preceding sentence.) My understand of what Jim Carter suggested is that if I want to talk about something unspecified falling to the floor, then I am required to use "zo'e" to indicated the unspecified subject: naku mi djica falling to the floor. I find this requirement odd. I can understand why you might want it---it forces a different kind of precision; but to me it makes more sense for an unspecified entity to remain unspecified. In other words, I think that naku mi djica It is false that I desire the event of falling to the floor should continue to avoid expressing the subject of falling to the floor. 5b. An alternative suggestion is to presume that Verb-Subject-Ojbect order is in effect if there is no sumti in the conventional sumti position. In this case naku mi djica would mean "*It is false that I desire the floor to fall." Again, in order to say that I want to avoid something unspecified from falling to the floor, I would have to say "zo'e" explicitly. I don't want to do that. Hence I think the lojban grammar is OK as is. Robert J. Chassell bob@gnu.ai.mit.edu Rattlesnake Mountain Road (413) 298-4725 or (617) 253-8568 or Stockbridge, MA 01262-0693 USA (617) 876-3296 (for messages)