From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Mon Mar  8 01:25:00 1993
Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Mon, 8 Mar 1993 12:26:44 -0500
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)    with BSMTP id 4350; Mon, 08 Mar 93 12:22:58 EST
Received: from CUVMB.BITNET by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP  id 4058; Mon, 08 Mar 93 12:24:59 EST
Date:         Mon, 8 Mar 1993 09:25:00 -0800
Reply-To: jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU
Subject:      Re: TECH:Lujvo Place Structure paper, part 2.
To:         lojban@cuvmb.columbia.edu
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Sun,               07 Mar 93 02:32:09 +1100."               <9303061536.AA13989@julia.math.ucla.edu>
Status: OR
Message-ID: <LzagUZaA1KM.A.s4.-20kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

> Date:          Sun, 7 Mar 1993 02:32:09 +1100
> From:  Nick Nicholas <nsn@MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU>
> Subject:       TECH:Lujvo Place Structure paper, part 2.

Thank you, Nick, for a very clear discussion of this subject.

> ... For example, the x2 of
> {djica} is either an event or a simple sumti. {le soidji}, in the be-lujvo
> interpretation, is someone who wants a soldier (le djica be lo sonci). In the
> belenu-lujvo interpretation, it is someone who wants to be a soldier, a
> wannabe
> soldier (le djica be lenu ri sonci), or perhaps someone who wants someone els
> to be a soldier (le djica be lenu zo'e sonci). In these cases, saying
> {nunsoidji} is a lot safer; in general, the user must be careful to use the
> abbreviated form only when no reasonable ambiguity will result. This is much
> clearer with bridi like {gasnu} and {rinka} than with, say, {djica} or {nelci

This ambiguity caused me a lot of trouble, and led me to the realization
that gismu places had to be defined just as much for usefulness in making
lujvo as for expressing their own meanings.  In particular, many words
like djica have places which in English are populated either by events or by
objects with an implicit event attached.  For example, "I want a soldier"
means, according to context, "I want a soldier to protect me", "I want a
soldier to make love to me", etc.  In a "logical language" it would make
sense to require users to be unambiguous, by defining the place to only
accept events.  For example:

    mi soidji                   I want to be a soldier
    mi selba'udji lo sonci      I want to be defended by a soldier
    mi ge'udji lo sonci         I want to make love to a soldier

And similarly:

    mi ctinei lo'e finpe        I am fond of %eating% fish
    mi jiknei la .alis.         I am fond of %socializing with% Alice
    mi pixntcu lo djacu         I need %to drink% water

Many (but not all) "belenu" lujvo could be made unambiguous in this way,
and in my opinion the resulting lujvo were no burden on the speakers and
were far clearer for the listeners.

                -- jimc