Message-Id: <199512071758.TAA03264@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Thu, 7 Dec 1995 12:56:48 -0500
Reply-To: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      TECH: PROPOSED GRAMMAR CHANGE X5: Restriction of JOI
To: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1568
Lines: 45

CHANGE X5

[This is an alternative to proposed changes X2 and X3.]

PRESENT LANGUAGE:

JOI can be used as sumti connective, but also in other contexts.

PROPOSED CHANGE:

Restrict the use of JOIs to sumti connectives.

RATIONALE:

In practice, JOIs are only used as sumti connectives.

As tanru connectives, they either don't make any sense
(ce, ce'o, jo'e, ku'a, pi'u) or they duplicate the meaning
of je (joi, jo'u). There have been brave attempts to give
{broda joi brode} and {broda jo'u brode} meanings other
than {broda je brode}, but they are all pretty strained
and don't relate to the meaning of {joi} as sumti connective.

{fa'u} is the only one that can make some sense in that role,
but it is not really ever used as a tanru connector, and it is
not worth dragging a whole selmaho into it just because of this
possible theoretical use of one member.

This makes change X3 unnecessary, because the generalization
of JE based on JOI is no longer applicable. Without this change,
you cannot really enforce the restriction of JE to tanru only.
Someone learning the language as a native (i.e. not from grammar
books but from hearing others using it) has no way of knowing that
{je} does not belong to selmaho JOI. They will hear {joi} used
everywhere that {je} is used, and so they will have no reason to
suppose that they can't use {je} wherever they can use {joi}.

PLUS:

{le broda joi le brode} becomes grammatical with elided {ku}.

NOTE: With this change, change X1 would only apply to sumti
connectives, which is where "stag BO" is really needed.

Jorge