Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 25 Aug 1993 10:34:18 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 25 Aug 1993 00:29:08 -0400 Message-Id: <199308250429.AA00885@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5161; Wed, 25 Aug 93 00:27:45 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8125; Wed, 25 Aug 93 00:30:29 EDT Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 00:28:23 EDT Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: a usage problem, and a solution X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: O X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Tue Aug 24 20:28:23 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Since I know what Nick was trying to say, since he knows what I am doing with th the gismu list: I am modifying the gismu list to reflect what JCB wrote about the comparble (i.e. relevant) gismu in his list, as appropriate. The problem, and hence any solutions thereto, is that of afterthought sumti-raising. If I had been selbri oriented in my thinking rather than sumti/t /topic oriented (which may or may not be malglico), then I might indeed have cho chosen a different selbri, so as to make it work. Having already expressed the sumti, and knowing the places I am trying to relate, it is often more difficult to come up with exactly what selbri I want than time permits. Therefore I indeed fall back on sumti-raising which Is indeed malglico or at least malrarnybangu. My problem was to come up with a grammatical method to express what I wanted, without having to "sa" and start the sentence over again. Since I am indeed trying to express a topic as x1 (which may be the underlyi ng reason for sumti-raising in natlangs, anyway), a construct that explicitly makes it a topic works. This is not to say that "jai" doesn't also work. But I have distrusted it from Nick's original proposal since I couldn't relate it to what I am doing in my head when I sumti-raise. I still haven't successfully done so, though this example at least is relevant to a real usage problem wherein tu'a doesn't work naturally. But I am still inclined to trust the prenex topicalizing more than jai, if people don't find it in some way flawed. lojbab