Message-Id: <199411300239.AA08200@nfs1.digex.net> From: Jorge Llambias Date: Tue Nov 29 21:39:28 1994 Subject: Re: lohe, lehe & ka Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Tue Nov 29 21:39:28 1994 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu la lojbab cusku di'e > 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. If you count relative clauses and property abstractions with the same index, it can be made unambiguous which level gets what number. A different question is whether we want to merge the two cases, but there is no problem of ambiguity, I think. > 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. They are at a deeper level than the relative clause, they get a new subscript, just like one relative clause within another. > 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 As it stands, ke'a would be the x1 of ckaji. If you wanted it to be le nanmu, you'd have to use a subscript (xi pa?, I forget the convention for embedded relative clauses.) To get it to refer to the man, you'd use the same subscript that you'd use in an inner relative clause to go up to the {le nanmu} level. > 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. That would be independent of the property, just like two relative clauses in the same sentences attached to two different sumti are independent of each other. There is no embedding in that case. > 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. It would be easier to see the example you have in mind. The one you give explicitly presents no problems, the one you describe I'm not sure I can understand what you mean. Jorge