From lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Fri Nov 22 00:29:29 1996 Received: from relay-10.mail.demon.net by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA16782 ; Fri, 22 Nov 96 00:29:27 GMT Received: from relay-9.mail.demon.net by mailstore for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk id 848608176:9:04761:12; Thu, 21 Nov 96 20:29:36 GMT Received: from cunyvm.cuny.edu ([128.228.1.2]) by relay-9.mail.demon.net id aa904821; 21 Nov 96 20:29 GMT Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 5916; Thu, 21 Nov 96 15:29:05 EST Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 4082; Thu, 21 Nov 96 15:28:51 EDT Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 15:28:51 -0500 Reply-To: "Mark E. Shoulson" Sender: Lojban list From: "Mark E. Shoulson" Subject: Re: place switching cmavo... X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Multiple recipients of list LOJBAN In-Reply-To: <199611211830.NAA06004@cs.columbia.edu> (message from Chris A Bogart on Thu, 21 Nov 1996 11:29:12 -0700) Message-ID: <848608162.94821.0@cunyvm.cuny.edu> Status: R >Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 11:29:12 -0700 >From: Chris A Bogart > >On Tue, 19 Nov 1996, R.M. Uittenbogaard wrote: > >> I always thought the places were numbered subsequently, and >> >> fo le dargu cu klama fa mi do lemi zdani le karce >> >> meant that "le karce" occupies the x4 place as well, which makes >> it equal in meaning to: >> >> mi klama do lemi zdani le dargu .e le karce , or >> mi klama do lemi zdani le dargu fo le karce >> >> So instead, filled places are skipped for subsequent sumti? > >I think you're right and Lojbab is mistaken on this one, but >I don't have my references here at work to look it up. > >I seem to remember a discussion on this where someone suggested >that (to use your example) le karce and le dargu would act >like appositives, supposedly naming the same thing (and I >forget the cmavo which would do this directly: po'u? no'u? >something like that maybe...) Sorry for the long quote and short addition, but it was all relevant. So far as I remember, it was undefined/semantic error to do something like "la djan. klama fa la jil. fe le zdani" or otherwise try to cram two sumti into one place with no appropriate explanation (e.g. conjunction or something). What would "le klama be fa la djan." mean? "John, the comer?" Hmm. It sounds like it should be a semantics error: if two things are the same, use po'u/no'u. If they both came, use .e/joi/etc. Is it semantically legal to do this kind of thing? (I know it's syntactically okay). ~mark