Re: [lojban-beginners] Place structure vs. grammatical morphemes

[Felipe Gonçalves Assis <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>]

On 13 October 2012 03:51, mashers <mail@mashley.net> wrote:
> But those roles still exist. They are defined in the brivla. The only difference I can see is that the role being specified is not announced explicitly, it is implied by the place structure of the brivla. Surely the same effect could be achieved by having a more flexible or complete set of pronouns/prepositions, resulting in greater breadth of communication of the semantics while still allowing the speaker to be explicit about the role they are talking about without assuming that the listener is familiar with the place structure of the brivla.
>

The roles _exist_? What is the role of dunda3? Is it the same as the one of
klama2, as suggested by the English preposition "to", or is it the same as
the role of xamgu2, as suggested by the use of the dative in Latin? In other
words, is it like the destination of a movement or the beneficiary of an act?

Also, what are the roles of pritu{1,2,3}?

mu'o
mi'e .asiz.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.