Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 22 Oct 1993 22:00:50 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Fri, 22 Oct 1993 22:00:46 -0400 Message-Id: <199310230200.AA07898@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4624; Fri, 22 Oct 93 21:58:45 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 1279; Fri, 22 Oct 93 22:01:44 EDT Date: Sat, 23 Oct 1993 11:58:44 +1000 Reply-To: Nick Nicholas Sender: Lojban list From: Nick Nicholas Subject: TECH: nested bridi anaphora X-To: Lojban Mailing List To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Sat Oct 23 21:58:44 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET I feel like a creep proposing one more addition to the language, but I think there's a real hole here: According to you, I stole the apple. But I didn't! .i cu'u do mi zerle'a le plise .i na'e go'i You thought I stole the apple. But I didn't! .i do jinvi ledu'u mi zerle'a le plise .i na'e ... I'll talk to you when I can. .i .ai mi tavla do co'a lenu mi ka'e no'a I thought I *could* see a dog, because I did! .i mi jinvi ledu'u mi ka'e viska lo gerku kei ki'u lenu ca'a ... What we haven't got is an anaphor to pick up bridi nested inside other bridi --- an inverse of {no'a}. What I think we need is a bridi version of {ri}, able to pick up any bridi in its path, not just sentential ones. Like {ri}, it can pick up both referents nested within a bridi, and the bridi itself, given subscripting. To make it refer to future bridi, give it a negative subscript. Let's say we call it, oh, {na'a}, of selma'o GOhA. The blanked out passages can then be expressed as: You thought I stole the apple. But I didn't [steal it]! .i do jinvi ledu'u mi zerle'a le plise .i mi na'e na'a You thought I stole the apple. But I didn't [think so]! .i do jinvi ledu'u mi zerle'a le plise .i mi na'e na'axire .i do jinvi ledu'u mi zerle'a le plise .i mi na'e go'i I thought I *could* see a dog, because I did [see it]! .i mi jinvi ledu'u mi ka'e viska lo gerku kei ki'u lenu ca'a na'a I *could* think I could see a dog, because I *did* [think so]! .i mi jinvi ledu'u mi ka'e viska lo gerku kei ki'u lenu ca'a na'axire .i mi jinvi ledu'u mi ka'e viska lo gerku kei ki'u lenu ca'a no'a Because I *did* [see it], I thought I *could* see a dog. .i ki'u lenu ca'a na'axini'upa kei mi jinvi ledu'u mi ka'e viska lo gerku If you feel like you have spare cmavo aplenty, you could also define a cataphora version of na'a (one refering explicitly to future bridi, so you won't have to use the minus sign). My suspicion is this won't come up often enough, and we don't have that many cmavo left. (We down to 20 yet?) %% %%% %%% %%% %%% %%% %%% %%% %%% %%% %%% %%% %%% non me tenent vincula, non me tenet clavis, % (nsn@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au) quaero mei similes et adjungor pravis. % Nick Nicholas, CogSci victim, --- Archipoeta, _Confessio_. % Univ. of Melbourne, Australia