From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU Fri Jul 22 18:50:09 1994
Message-Id: <199407222250.AA16592@nfs1.digex.net>
Date: Fri Jul 22 18:50:09 1994
Reply-To: Nick NICHOLAS <nsn@vis.mu.oz.au>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Nick NICHOLAS <nsn@vis.mu.oz.au>
Subject:      Re: ciska bai tu'a zo bai
X-To:         cbogart@QUETZAL.COM
X-Cc:         Lojban Mailing List <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@access.digex.net>
In-Reply-To:  <199407211801.4403@krang.vis.mu.OZ.AU> from "Chris Bogart" at Jul
              21, 94 11:25:45 am
Status: RO

Hu'tegh! nuq ja' Chris Bogart jay'?

=If I were writing the gismu definitions I would change instances of
="object/event" to just "event", for clarity, and I would argue that that
=should not change the meanings at all.  If nelci's x2 only allowed an event,
=but you stuck "do" in there anyway, e.g. "mi nelci do", then the listener
=trying to stretch their brain to think of "do" as an event or property,
=would actually end up with the meaning that was probably intended. i.e. I
=like "you", the event/abstraction, not some particular event that you
=participated in.  "mi nelci tu'a do", then, is also correct, but means "I
=like something about you".  The "object" in "object/event", then, is just a
=clue to the semantics of the predicate, not an arbitrary restriction on the
=use of the place.

=The same can be said, but far less usefully, of the x1 place of bapli.  "mi
=bapli lenu broda" could mean that my mere existence forces something to
=happen, and maybe someone would want to say that, but the meaning isn't what
=you'd expect in a malglico word-for-word translation.  The danger of
=mistranslation there is a good reason not to list "object" as a possibility
=for the x1 place. An object is legal there but should only be used by
=trained professionals wearing certified safety equipment :-)

Which is why I don't think this is workable in practice --- at least in a
gi'uste. In fact, it's an unLojbanic ambiguity. Let {do} be an object; if
you wish to speak of {do} the event, it's much safer to say {lenu me do}
or something.

Nonetheless, your interpretation of {nelci do} as liking an event is
fascinating, and I'll try and remember to chase it up with any semanticists
I know. Lojbab, could you take this up with pc?

=        ga'i    hauteur/rank    equal rank      meekness/lack of rank [galtu]

I'll get back to this once I read through the full thread.

--
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Nick Nicholas. Linguistics, University of Melbourne.   nsn@krang.vis.mu.oz.au
        nsn@mundil.cs.mu.oz.au      nick_nicholas@muwayf.unimelb.edu.au
            AND MOVING SOON TO: nnich@speech.language.unimelb.edu.au