Return-Path: Message-Id: <9208300401.AA25218@relay1.UU.NET> Date: Sun Aug 30 02:58:01 1992 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: relative clauses on selbri X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Sun Aug 30 02:58:01 1992 X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!cuvmb.bitnet!LOJBAN No, Bob won't get apoplexy. I've thought about it a lot myself. But pc has argued convincingly that restricting a selbri is logically identical to a separate sentence logically connected (i.e. gi'e with all common sumti to the left of the selbri). If we are to preserve the logical character of the language we must rty to avoid this 'convenience' that results from mapping natlang habits based on our language having a copula. After all "*ti cu broda poi brode" is almost always a mapping from the English equivalent of "ti du [lo] broda poi brode"; e.g. this is a house that is red. I think people who get free of the copular link tend very rarely to make this error, but beginners WILL make the error until they learn how Lojban differs from copular languages. lojbab