From LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:44:34 2010 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 26 Feb 1993 12:44:12 -0500 Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7638; Fri, 26 Feb 93 12:43:45 EST Received: from CUVMB.BITNET by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4032; Fri, 26 Feb 93 12:46:18 EST Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1993 16:05:02 GMT Reply-To: C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK Sender: Lojban list From: C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK Subject: basti xa'urjudri X-To: LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET, kers@hplb.hpl.hp.com, jbo_ritcyd.maildb@bradford.ac.uk To: Erik Rauch Status: OR X-From-Space-Date: Fri Feb 26 12:44:14 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Message-ID: I was going to send this only to rityjbo and lojbab, as of limited interest to the rest, but I came upon a grammatical point, so I'm sending it more widely la cimast padjed zo'u mi xabju nu'i co'uku la spensr. darg. .e co'aku la pembrtn. velklam. .i to'unai mi co'a se xa'urjudri la'o gy. 33 Pemberton Drive Bradford BD7 1RA gy. .i mi co'a se fonjudri li norezevo pi'e zecicixabino co'omi'e kolin The-one-named 3-month 1-day as-for: I inhabit [cessitively the-one-named spencer road] and [initiatively the-one-named pemberton thing-travelled-via]. In detail I initiatively am inhabit-addressed-by quote 33 Pemberton Drive Bradford BD7 1RA end-quote. I initiatively am phone-addressed-by the-number 0274:733680 Partings-I-am Colin Note on the grammar: I first tried connected sumti: mi xabju co'u sy. .eco'abo py. ("cessitively S and initiatively P") but this makes the whole phrase "sy. .eco'abo py." a tcita sumti, introduced by the (aspectual) sumti tcita "co'u", hence "I inhabit at-the-end-of (temporally) [S and startingly P]" So I was looking for a more coordinate form, and tried "*mi xabju geco'ubo sy. .egico'abo py." (intended to mean "I inhabit [both endingly S and startingly P]" but this is ungrammatical on two counts: you can't use (though I suspect this has changed since the grammar I have) and in any case you can't use . I then realised that what I must mean was a termset, because effectively I had two pairs of linked sumti - the old address and corresponding temporal sumti, and the new address with its temporal sumti. I think this works, but it's fiddly. Furthermore, I'm not happy about "co'aku" - as I have said in an earlier discussion, ZAhO pattern differently from other sumti tcita in that their meaning is in a sense reversed depending on whether they are sumti tcita or selbri tcita. "co'aku" and the like are syntactically , ie sumti tcita lacking their sumti, so I feel they ought to have the meaning fo sumti tcita. But this use relies on their behaving like selbri tcita, ie "mi xabju co'uku sy." means "mi co'u xabju sy." and not "mi xabju sy. co'u zo'e" (NB In case anybody is wondering, this discussion has nothing to do with the other discussion going on about *mo'u: the selbri is predicated of both sumti, and so we are in the common ground of 'esemaubo'-type constructions.)