From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu Sat May 13 12:21:08 1995 Date: Sat, 13 May 1995 12:23:01 EDT From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Subject: Re: Questions To: Bob LeChevalier Message-ID: > If you want to be explicit about it being a performative you can say > > "mi rapygau lenu mi ca'e ckire" > > IMO "ca'e" is a generic performative marker; not just "I define" as it is > glossed. A synonym for "sepi'o dei", or "hereby". Is that consistent with > the consensus? It sounds right, but I wouldn't use it in that position as a tag of {mi}. Rather mark the whole sentence: ca'e mi rapygau le nu mi ckire > >> Could I say > >> > >> mi ckire sei rapli > >> > > > >I don't really feel comfortable with {sei}. I don't fully understand it. > > I don't know I do either, but that is consistent with how I use it. I tend > to think of it as simply a way of attatching something to a sentence without > any precise logical relationship to the sentence. The problem (or maybe not) that I see is that inside a quotation, sei talks about the text, but here it talks about the action described by the text. Maybe it is not a problem, but Lojban tends to distinguish these two things carefully, and here we seem to be ignoring the distinction. Jorge >From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu >From lojbab To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Subject: Re: Questions sei was originally added to the language in order to a) allow one to make metalinguistic statements about the text (and/or the speaker) and b) sspecifically to deal with describing how a quote was made (he says parenthetically). The latter can be inserted within the body of a text quote as "seisa'a" which amounts to a temporary unquote. Longer temporary unquotes cvan be made using tosa'a ...toi lojbab