From cowan Tue Oct 17 13:50:20 1995 Subject: PROPOSED GRAMMAR CHANGE 36: Simplify vocative expressions From: John Cowan To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu (Lojban List) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1995 13:50:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1426 Status: OR Message-ID: CURRENT LANGUAGE: There are three basic kinds of vocative phrases: "DOI name", "DOI selbri", and "DOI sumti". (Here DOI stands for possible multiple COIs with or without following DOI as well). The third case, "DOI sumti", is the general case which can handle whatever is needed with some extra cmavo, since "DOI name" really means "DOI la name", and "DOI selbri" really means "DOI le selbri". Relative clauses are currently allowed after "DOI name", and either before or after the selbri in "DOI selbri". However, if relative clauses precede the selbri, then a full sumti-tail-1 (essentially a description without a descriptor) is permitted. PROPOSED CHANGE: Only allow a selbri in the context "DOI relative-clauses ...". This allows "DOI selbri" to have relative clauses before or after the selbri, but not both, and quantifiers are disallowed altogether. RATIONALE: The current language allows vocative phrases of certain types only if a preposed relative clause is present: "DOI relative-clauses quantifier selbri", "DOI relative-clauses quantifier selbri relative-clauses", "DOI relative-clauses quantifier sumti", and possibly other forms. All of these are meaningful, but their existence makes vocative phrases hard to teach. Nothing is lost by making these forms ungrammatical, because if they are needed, a full sumti can be used instead. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.