Re: [bpfk] Finishing the BPFK sections

[Adam Lopresto <adamlopresto@gmail.com>]

Having given it some thought, I'm now thinking it would be best to include an explicit mention of an origin in the definitions. So something like 

ca'u: indicates that the event is in front of a certain point, that is, between that point and the origin. When tagging a sumti, the sumti specifies the point that the event is in front of, when viewed from the origin.

And each definition have a Notes section with some text describing the origin. Right now, the best I have is "Implicit origin is supplied by context, and is often, but not always, the speaker. Explicit origin is assignable with {ki}."

Then {ri'u} becomes "Spatial tense. It indicates that the event is located to the right of a certain point when viewed from the origin. When tagging a sumti, the sumti specifies the point the event to the right of." with the same note.

I'm open to other ideas, but I think being explicit about that sort of thing is useful.

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 1:26 PM, selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de> wrote:

la xalbo cu cusku di'e

I'd like to see some of the Non-Contact Spatials spelled out a little
more clearly. In particular, I think the intention is that {ri'u ko'a
broda} assumes that {ko'a} has an orientation, and that the event of
{broda}-ing is to {ko'a}'s right, and that the speaker's location and
orientation are irrelevant, but that point is not entirely clear from
the definition as stated.      

To me it's not about the facing of the tagged sumti. Some things do not even have an intrinsic orientation. A tree has no clearly identifyable front, yet something can be in front of the tree from a certain point of view.

Same question for {ca'u} and {ti'a}. "In front of X" can mean "between
me and X" ("a shadow passed in front of the moon"), or it could mean "in
the direction that X is facing". Both should be expressible, and the
definitions need to be unambiguously one or the other.

Both are expressible. {ca'u} unambiguously means the former to me, but it's not necessarily between X and *me*. It's in front of X as seen from a certain frame of reference or reference point.

   lo ctino cu pagre ca'u lo lunra
   "A shadow passed in front of the moon."

This doesn't specify from what direction we're looking at the situation (at the moon), but just as with other tenses, this implicit reference point tends to be the here and now of the speaker unless context suggests otherwise. We can of course be explicit and use {ki}, which sets the space-time frame of reference.

   ki mi lo gerku cu denpa ri'u lo tricu
   "From where I am, the dog is waiting to the right of the tree."

This expands directly to:

   lo nu lo gerku cu denpa cu pritu lo tricu mi
   "The event of the dog waiting is to the right of the tree from me."

For all tenses, {broda TENSE ko'e} is {lo nu broda cu TENSE_SELBRI ko'e}, and tenses based on ternary predicates which involve a frame of reference additionally use {ki} to mark that frame of reference (e.g. {za}, {zo'i}, {vi}, {ni'a}, ...).

I agree that clarifying this somehow in the definitions would be useful.

mi'e la selpa'i mu'o

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.