Message-Id: <199511161653.LAA18713@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Thu, 16 Nov 1995 08:25:19 -0800
Reply-To: jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Jim Carter <jimc@MATH.UCLA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: TECH: PROPOSED CHANGE 37: Relative Clauses before names
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Wed, 15 Nov 95 17:24:59 EST."
              <9511152227.AA10867@julia.math.ucla.edu>
Status: OR

John Cowan writes:

> PROPOSED CHANGE #37
>
> Allow relative clauses between LA or DOI and a CMENE.  Also allow relative
> clauses after "DOI CMENE" or "DOI relative-clauses CMENE".

No question in my mind that this is necessary (I vote yes).

How would one handle a predicate name with imbedded sumti?  Or imbedded UI?  It
would be most "logical" that arguments, decorations, modal phrases and
 subordinate
clauses attach to the argument selbri the same on a name as on any other kind of
selbri, but as noted in the proposal, subphrases might be an integral part of
 the
name or might be gratuitous additions.  So perhaps the rule should be that
all ADMPSC before the selbri are integral, and all after are semantic.

Bizarre example, perhaps kid's teasing:

        ta cmene la fe lo toldi ku kalte be fi le nu citka
        His name is Hunter of Butterflies (for eating)

{toldi-butterflies} is an integral part of the name, while {le nu citka} is
a sumti within sumti, but is very gratuitously added.  ([todkalte} would be
 better
if you're thinking what to name your kid.  I'm not even going to try to give an
example of an imbedded UI.

James F. Carter        Voice 310 825 2897       FAX 310 206 6673
UCLA-Mathnet;  6115 MSA; 405 Hilgard Ave.; Los Angeles, CA, USA  90095-1555
Internet: jimc@math.ucla.edu (finger for PGP key)
UUCP:...!{ucsd,ames,ncar,gatech,purdue,rutgers,decvax,uunet}!math.ucla.edu!jimc