From LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Sat Mar  6 22:46:01 2010
Reply-To: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Date: Sat Dec  9 18:48:27 1995
From: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: RET: non-connective fa'u (PU: comments on CONN.TXT)
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu, jorge@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR
X-From-Space-Date: Sat Dec  9 18:48:27 1995
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU
Message-ID: <CqbQg1r7hQC.A.KxF.pu0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

la goran cusku di'e

> > > 10. 14.16. (a) Is there a non-connective version of fahu? As in
> > > "the two men love their respective spouses".
> > Unfortunately no. Since I have no use for {le'i} and co., I might
> > start using them for that function.
>
> pa'aku? as in
>
>     le re nanmu pa'a prami le ri speni

You are right that that is taught somewhere (maybe in the Lessons?)
as the way to do that, but it goes against logic. If you don't know
the idiom, it should be understood as:

        Each of the two men loves the wife(s) of each/both,
        in parallel.

Each of the events of loving occurs in parallel with something, maybe
with each other, but {pa'a ku} has no way of influencing what {ri}
stands for, unless by sheer idiom (or "idiotismo" in Esperanto).
{pa'a} would be the only BAI that behaves in such a strange manner,
influencing not the meaning of the selbri but the logical structure
of the bridi.

It may be true that {le re nanmu cu prami le ri speni} means that
each loves his own wife, though, without any need for the strange {pa'a}.
That depends on how exactly {ri} behaves with sumti that have more
than one referent, which is not yet clear to me.

Jorge