[lojban-beginners] Re: sides

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Michael Turniansky
<mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  fi'o constructions create modals (BAI) not tenses (FAhA).  Although
> they are related semantically, they are not the same.

More generally, they are all tags. "fi'o" converts a selbri into a tag.

A fi'o-construction is not exactly the same as a BAI either. A BAI can
be preceded with NAhE and SE, and followed with NAI and KI, whereas a
fi'o-construction cannot. But I think all tags should have the same
grammar. Learning all the subtle differences in the grammars of BAI,
FAhA, PU, VEhA, ZEhA, ZAhO, etc. is just pointless complication, and I
doubt anyone actually bothers to learn them. Here is a proposal to
unify and simplify their grammars:
http://www.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Internal+grammar+of+tags

> In particular,
> you say te'e=fi'o se korbi.  But fi'o se korbi=se koi.  does te'e=se
> koi?

Maybe, or maybe not, I don't think I have ever used either. In
jbovlaste I have actually defined "te'e" as "fi'o se koizva". Maybe
the difference is that one comes from "x1 is the border of x2" and the
other "x1 is _at_ the border of x2". But this distinction is not made
for pritu/zunle/berti/snanu/stici/stuna and others, so it's not clear
why it is important precisely for "korbi".

In any case, I find that "bu'u" is the only relatively useful FAhA.
For all the others, it almost always seems necessary or preferrable to
use the selbri.

> (still waiting for a cmavo for fi'o cpana and fi'o kansa,
> myself...)

I guess "fi'o se cpana" if it was to be a FAhA.

mu'o mi'e xorxes