From lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRD-isHmBBoE1DJ9Dg@googlegroups.com Tue Nov 02 10:08:29 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.213.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PDKLR-0004wl-Hb; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:08:28 -0700 Received: by yxe42 with SMTP id 42sf11443193yxe.16 for ; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:08:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:message-id:x-ymail-osg:received :x-mailer:references:date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=loS7yea1knQsueiv9o/BvXDiCsP+O1ciShkq3QWaH10=; b=a6SMBG/wjRe2mpI+NT8vlZuiY+8WCJpvXRXCUPKYkcukZietW6MC9oD4t0/aymhUXe EcSnC9ZjG00JYlMxotR0ibZy1AfbR4rcN21V8qpNqhKEw9CQBdZiesby2JG+KAi247Uu nqUy3wLJf71WuJv1WQCCUy5DQB12BuPztsTBc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:x-ymail-osg:x-mailer:references :date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=BgMf8yNnCITIXmaalDYAQ6MyT955QPy204qfMHJfRciXOQKhnNRfQQda04UH5MaEjf HV2n+C+qFMLzhtuf79uberipItXiW596fq2Ur6hO6in795b8fMVXSMu+sqUpzm7WCtur NMU64jznfwwwu4eq622fqvOi875oC/uD4kdpo= Received: by 10.90.13.17 with SMTP id 17mr183205agm.47.1288717694370; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:08:14 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.90.102.16 with SMTP id z16ls55941agb.4.p; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.82.14 with SMTP id f14mr885211agb.17.1288717693433; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.82.14 with SMTP id f14mr885210agb.17.1288717693420; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.199.118]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id p9si2860863ybk.4.2010.11.02.10.08.12; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:08:12 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.118 as permitted sender) client-ip=68.142.199.118; Received: (qmail 29560 invoked by uid 60001); 2 Nov 2010 17:08:11 -0000 Message-ID: <868021.27633.qm@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: skpW9NwVM1mM36bSbSUQ9er0g0.l3m.kO_eE1bfxSfCrSrA IqU73fYMM5BVQhcv6Jyqir3DlaC9xMX8K6DVAp8RSNy9E2AVxp4OUI57fNyh FiduMLhTuS_WsHfXcorLBJx3v2dv_QW5BDeO0tP1CF0rwIB7CQTZgcDlJn50 mN3ku2bd0fq4jqnUtBgiSBKUr7Zny37jvLLCBuy_FqtIbjuTpMQolnxssnft zEDyey4S.cdGZS2rQQPe2zUQS97m1QLhCLbBAlAnLn0Qu7rDFDy.8Is7qswB uwMbE9PmhdLeTPvzBKvW1ly4AApty_hPO7jUj4.F0XYdZh9AgHtk_NtEJk6H iib3OaDL.8P4I_cmYC7wleQ66uSIzwztReazZhisDCO5jJAA- Received: from [99.92.110.13] by web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 02 Nov 2010 10:08:11 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/504.5 YahooMailWebService/0.8.107.284920 References: <407677.11990.qm@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 10:08:11 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: Re: [lojban] A summary on 'djica' etc. To: lojban@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.118 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@yahoo.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable @2 Raising replacement occurs all the time, but the argument for that claim= =20 involves a number of not universally accepted claims about the nature of de= ep=20 structure. It is usually not a problem and only becomes one when world-bor= ders=20 are crossed (well, maybe some other similar cases, but not many). And one = point=20 of my remarks was exactly that it shouldn't be done in Lojban when world bo= rders=20 are crossed outward. Of course, the other part is that the only way that a= n=20 object term makes sense as x2 of 'djica' is as a raising from an event=20 description, a claim with which I assume you disagree. The support for it = comes=20 from the logic of 'djica' (and a number of other desire predicates, which m= ay=20 have various added features -- like an obligatory purpose for 'nitci'): "i= f a=20 (subjunctive) apple, then..." doesn't make a lot of sense, or grammar eith= er. =20 I suppose there is some way around this to get the same results, but I have= n't=20 thought of it yet, nor, so far as I can recall, have you. Notice that borde= r=20 crossing inward is not a problem, and so 'mi djica ta' and similar claims w= ith=20 selected current objects are OK. @car talk. Actually, I think I am saying that 'mi pensi lo karce' is a rai= se=20 from 'mi pensi tu'a lo karce'. I haven't looked at the logic of 'pensi' ye= t,=20 but I suspect it is subjunctive or, at least, subjective, and so borders ge= t=20 crossed. I may regret this later, of course, but for now I'll be consisten= t. @5. Events don't solve a problem here, they explain it. If I take the app= le=20 out of 'lo nu mi citka lo plise' I take it out of the world(s) of these=20 apple-eating events into the current one, where it may or may not do what i= s=20 wanted of it (but there is no a priori reason to think it will). But the e= vent=20 is already in this world (I know you don't agree with that either, but I=20 persist) and so it passes through the border crossing unscathed. I might h= ave a=20 problem saying which apple eating event(s) I desire, but I am sure it is th= e=20 same one(s) whose occurrence would satisfy my desire and whose occurrence= =20 follows from that desire being satisfied. This is just like the case of wa= nting=20 *that*: its identity (more easily traced out here) remains unchanged throug= h the=20 subjunctive gear grinding. Note: no token-type talk here; this is all abou= t=20 individuals. (The "You must be willing to say which one" is a bit of hyper= bole=20 to drive home a point.) ----- Original Message ----.. =20 From: Jorge Llamb=EDas To: lojban@googlegroups.com Sent: Tue, November 2, 2010 8:20:27 AM Subject: Re: [lojban] A summary on 'djica' etc. On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 11:34 PM, John E. Clifford wr= ote: > > 2, There is in Lojban, as in many languages, a grammatical process calle= d=20 >raising, by which a term in a subordinate position is brought into a highe= r=20 >clause. It may come to replace that subordinate clause or to fill another= =20 >position in superordinate clause. The definition in wikipedia doesn't say anything about replacement. Lojban is full of predicates with sumti raising of the "in another position" type. I don't think the replacement move works in Lojban as a purely grammatical move. Using "tu'a ko'a" as short for "lo nu ko'a co'e" is not replacement, because "ko'a" is not being raised there. The case of "jai broda" is not replacement either, because "jai broda" and "broda" are two different predicates. > This is a sort of reverse of the process of eliding information that is= =20 >repeated, when it is "obvious". So, in "I'm thinking of buying a car" we d= on't=20 >mention that it is me buying the car; that's obvious. But similarly, I mi= ght=20 >report those same thought as "I am thinking about a car", raising "a car" = from=20 >the clause "that I buy a car" (in there at some level) to replace it. But you are talking of a semantic move here, not a syntactic one, right? "mi pensi lo karce" is not a version of "mi pensi tu'a lo karce", the way "mi pensi tu'a lo karce" is just a compact way of saying "mi pensi lo nu lo karce cu co'e". > 5. [...] We need a particular apple which is the one I desire. [...] What frustrates me a bit is that one day you say you understand my point about events not solving this "problem" at all, and the next day you are back again presenting events as a "solution". If you have a problem with "mi djica lo plise", you should have the exact same problem with "mi djica lo plisynuncti". If you can't want apples without there being a particular one you want then you also can't want apple-eatings without there being a particular one you want. If you have no problem with wanting apple-eatings, you shouldn't have a problem with wanting apples. Apple-eatings are just as subject to the type-token distinction (or whatever you want to call it) as apples are. > Of course, this problem does not arise if you pick your apple before hand= , as=20 >it were, in this story before going to the alternates. And yet you don't need to pick your apple-eating before hand? Apple-eatings can be just as distinguishable and individuated as apples. Suppose there are three apples on the table, and there are two apple-eatings in the room. If I say I want an apple, you feel compelled to ask me which one I'm talking about, why don't you feel the same compulsion if I say I want an apple-eating? mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups= =20 "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to=20 lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at=20 http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den. =20 --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.