From lojban+bncCJbznvHdFRDZ393oBBoEl6srUg@googlegroups.com Sun Dec 26 08:40:11 2010 Received: from mail-fx0-f61.google.com ([209.85.161.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PWtdc-000827-LZ; Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:40:11 -0800 Received: by fxm10 with SMTP id 10sf2439003fxm.16 for ; Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:39:58 -0800 (PST) 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:received:mime-version:received :in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :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; bh=3+MpiJNY37cjhla/Qqky9AJ8VkF70AB2s61vdXedClg=; b=e/sBHUcULrrladw2Tr+c+C/oPS5anKk9wrLMIQSiWFi11IAcPxHPZPNP9h/cYYEN+W L7OE+CC8g4jVnUdo29Q95GqxBRwUMHgs2UyzqBn9Gdwg59EE0y/ObJMTolUVQRYOyue6 qY50bpd4glKQQpuH5fq1x2x8SDUhmR5vO3kzo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to: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; b=uP0DYCo67+IDWBN4zzt7qpzt+jFPGYJ4+/kLQU4EvVsjFesoloy5xD4IUM2xVbB2Bb pVz35Mo3huq2gI7t80smCzC9bITDJoNazda+B7QlVnoiHdP27wCxKf90YiwJw4DLIQwX PeVxzPo6OyqSyU2p7MUZFNM0Ktj4++uebg2B4= Received: by 10.223.93.196 with SMTP id w4mr686434fam.44.1293381593877; Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:39:53 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.223.160.8 with SMTP id l8ls2869076fax.2.p; Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:39:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.96.203 with SMTP id i11mr817381fan.18.1293381592784; Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:39:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.96.203 with SMTP id i11mr817380fan.18.1293381592754; Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:39:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-fx0-f42.google.com (mail-fx0-f42.google.com [209.85.161.42]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 9si972741fax.5.2010.12.26.08.39.51; Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:39:51 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lytlesw@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.42 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.42; Received: by mail-fx0-f42.google.com with SMTP id 11so7746780fxm.29 for ; Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:39:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.83.4 with SMTP id d4mr3152578fal.59.1293381591301; Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:39:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.155.139 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Dec 2010 08:39:31 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: MorphemeAddict Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2010 11:39:31 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Tanru automatically forming To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lytlesw@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lytlesw@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.42 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lytlesw@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.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: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3054a5294f0051049852deec --20cf3054a5294f0051049852deec Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Your suggestion seems counterintuitive to me. The relationship between a modified word and its modifier (a tanru) seems much closer than that between a predicate and its arguments, so marking arguments seems more reasonable than separating modified/modifiers, especially when more than two words are involved, e.g., "barda bajra nelci gerku bangu" (a nonce phrase, of course). stevo On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Ian Johnson wrote: > I know this is vastly too fundamental to be changed at this stage of the > language's development, but why do tanru automatically form? Presumably the > more common a construction is, the fewer cmavo it should take to say it. > (This isn't a direct correlation, though; for example, NU constructions are > very common, but by their nature there is probably no way to avoid having > some cmavo to deal with them.) And certainly {lo gerku cu klama} is more > common than {lo gerku klama cu bajra}. Why wasn't it decided in the ancient > (Loglan?) days to have tanru form only with a cmavo? To clarify, suppose the > cmavo were {ja'ei}* for the default grouping ({ke} and friends would still > work the same way without needing {ja'ei}). Then {lo gerku klama} would be > "the dog goes" while {lo gerku ja'ei klama bajra} would be "the > dog-kind-of-goer runs". Isn't this a bit more sensible than what is > established now? > > *Certainly in an actual situation like this, this cmavo would be a CV, > since it would be pretty common. I'm fairly sure there are no CVs to spare > now, though, so it would've been confusing to use one. > > mu'o mi'e .latros. > > -- > 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@googlegroups.com > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. > -- 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@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. --20cf3054a5294f0051049852deec Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Your suggestion seems counterintuitive to me. The relationship between= a modified word and its modifier (a tanru) seems much closer than that bet= ween a predicate and its arguments, so marking arguments seems more reasona= ble than separating modified/modifiers, especially when more than two words= are involved, e.g., "barda bajra nelci gerku bangu" (a nonce phr= ase, of course).
stevo
On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@= gmail.com> wrote:
I know this is vastly too fundam= ental to be changed at this stage of the language's development, but wh= y do tanru automatically form? Presumably the more common a construction is= , the fewer cmavo it should take to say it. (This isn't a direct correl= ation, though; for example, NU constructions are very common, but by their = nature there is probably no way to avoid having some cmavo to deal with the= m.) And certainly {lo gerku cu klama} is more common than {lo gerku klama c= u bajra}. Why wasn't it decided in the ancient (Loglan?) days to have t= anru form only with a cmavo? To clarify, suppose the cmavo were {ja'ei}= * for the default grouping ({ke} and friends would still work the same way = without needing {ja'ei}). Then {lo gerku klama} would be "the dog = goes" while {lo gerku ja'ei klama bajra} would be "the dog-ki= nd-of-goer runs". Isn't this a bit more sensible than what is esta= blished now?

*Certainly in an actual situation like this, this cmavo would be a CV, = since it would be pretty common. I'm fairly sure there are no CVs to sp= are now, though, so it would've been confusing to use one.

mu'o mi'e .latros.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the G= oogle Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email= to lojban@goo= glegroups.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.

--
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.
--20cf3054a5294f0051049852deec--