Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rCZmK-00007FC; Tue, 29 Nov 94 23:08 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8193; Tue, 29 Nov 94 23:08:13 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 8189; Tue, 29 Nov 1994 23:08:13 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6389; Tue, 29 Nov 1994 22:04:58 +0100 Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 08:49:50 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: lohe, lehe & ka X-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1749 Lines: 37 JL>la lojbab cusku di'e JL> JL>> ke'a would not work for the proposed marker because it already has an JL>> assigned meaning, and it is easy to envision conflict in that meaning JL>> (unless I am missing something). What happens when the reference is JL>> inside a relative clause and is NOT the relativized pronoun. JL> JL>Same thing that happens when there is one relative clause inside another, JL>we have to resort to subindices. JL> JL>Fortunately, {ke'a} is only rarely needed, and such embedding is even JL>rarer, so the problem wouldn't arise much in practice. The solution JL>(indexing) is a bad one, but it is sufficient for a problem that doesn't JL>seem to appear in practice. Except that indexing is unambiguous if ke'a ONLY is used as a relative pronoun, since there is only one such pronoun per level of nesting. Now you are talking about providing a second possible meaning for ke'a that has nothing to do with relative pronouns, but which could also occur in a relative clause. No amount of subscripting will make it clear what the referent of this ke'a is, since people will look for it to be a relative pronoun. JL>The property and the relative clause are at different levels, so it can JL>be disambiguated with subindices, if ever it is needed. But what about properties that are expressed INSIDE relative clauses. e.g."the man whose actions are characterized by goodness" le nanmu poi le ke'a nu zukte cu ckaji le ka *ke'a xamgu Now you can claim that you could make this a ke'a sub zero, but what if there is a relative clause involving that sumti within the stated relative clause. In that case, ke'a sub zero would be a self-reference and not a reference to the x1 of ckaji as I think you would intend here. lojbab