[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lojban-beginners] Re: la'e di'u
- To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
- Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: la'e di'u
- From: Stela Selckiku <selckiku@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 01:43:56 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=sydYwNURdv4ESPIenfiPgWYN4g99nxpxYkkSNUE0H8g=; b=VsZOKiShK20wt26shGaomM8hnIC4ReLxBRB4EjzPlwQ291oTwtbBnyWjpDYzVr0e/A Osqlelu6VmPSTj0T/5EWANktWHPgKJwX0n0ywhKYBIqXc3+RmGzVPUXjXJClbxmmuR8w guCPDASquFQeopWkFlIxRLh7JghqzYIoWN2A0=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=F6jYD7Cyt6OLEPGY6IPxnmq2T2agGq7KBKYNg9mhFVM/++dCFXNo6lFqg9ko127vXq 0K4kt/pYo0bUgGqiHKhVifJl4HoibD4gsEfMt/fDnwQRlYeIW7BLCRgXxWvfbngfVoYx amSr6pMry7pl5xHInQ6hbv2q0dtD3RMRbOiqk=
- In-reply-to: <5715b9300903312101y8a22955vc5b7bed6e52e9ae6@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <5715b9300903312101y8a22955vc5b7bed6e52e9ae6@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
- Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> So the definition of "la'e" is "the referent of (indirect pointer);". This
> seems like a very fuzzy kind of idea. If I say "mi gleki lo nu do pu klama
> lo zarci" in the next utterance will "la'e di'u" refer to my happiness, me,
> or the event of "do pu klama lo zarci"? Would the listener just have to
> pick this sort of thing up from context?
No it means something very specific. Each bridi is a description of a
relationship, in the case of "mi gleki lo nu do pu klama lo zarci",
the relationship of "gleki" between "mi" and "lo nu li'o". The
referent found by "la'e" therefore is the relationship itself which
the "di'u" sentence is a description of.
First think about how "la'e" applies to something simpler, like a
symbol or description of a symbol. "la'e lu la nicte cadzu li'u", the
referent of the piece of text "la nicte cadzu", is a book by la
camgusmis. If we're talking about the name "selckiku", and we say
"la'e le cmene", the referent of the name, that would be the selcme,
the person named, me. Now, getting very close to using it with
"di'u", let's try it with a whole sentence: "la'e lu mi gleki lo nu do
pu klama lo zarci li'u" -- the referent of that sentence, namely, the
relationship of "gleki" asserted between "mi" and "lo nu li'o". (You
could also refer to a sentence indirectly, like "la'e le jufra",
referent of the sentence.)
So if you say "mi gleki", that statement as a whole can be considered
a symbol, which refers to a referent (the actual fact of my
happiness). If you then pick it up with "di'u", you are referring
then to the statement considered as a symbol. "la'e" turns that into
a reference to the relationship which the statement/symbol refers to.
.i dei jufra .i di'u melbi jufra
& this.sentence sentence & previous.sentence beautiful sentence
This is a sentence. That was a beautiful sentence.
.i dei jufra .i la'e di'u fatci gi'e nai jufra
& this.sentence sentence & referent.of previous.sentence fact and not sentence
This is a sentence. That sentence described a fact, not a sentence.
It's a rather abstract concept and I fear I've failed to explain it
clearly, so someone else please take a swing too. But, um,
incidentally, have you ever met "le nu go'i"? :) Grab for that first.
mu'o mi'e la selckiku