Re: [lojban-beginners] Place structure "types"

[MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Judson Lester <nyarly@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm editing a flash card deck of lojban words for my own use, and one of the things that's struck me is how often gismu constrain the kinds of things in a position.

Most of the time the constraint makes sense (at least in a "sure, I can see it" kind of way) but as I find more gismu where a position is defined as being a person or an event (and all the ones that are {ka}) when the other way might make sense, I begin to wonder more and more why (or if?) the suggested kinds for a place aren't merely a guidance.

For example, I'm just looking at

jenca: x1 (event) shocks/stuns x2

What would be the problem with "do jenca mi"?  I suppose there's some elided abstraction that I could use in the x1 place to mean "some event related to you" - but why would that be neccesary?

Or do I misunderstand - is the point that jenca describes a shock related to an event, and *therefore* "do jenca" implies that you did something shocking on the face of it?

If it's the latter, are the other abstraction requirements (and other implied types) likewise looser than I imagine?

Judson

According to lojbab on Jan. 16, 2013: 

"The parenthetical use in the gismu list is NOT a restriction (and indeed there aren't really ANY restrictions so long as it is grammatical - the semantics of lojban has not been formally defined).

It is an indication that, at the time the definition was written, it was believed that the place would most commonly be filled by an abstraction of that type, as opposed to a non-abstraction.  These parenthetical invocations of abstraction were added to the place structures as a warning against sumti-raising, which was the then-major topic in semantics of the time.  I went through all of the place structures trying to word them to get people to avoid raising a sumti from an implied abstraction and using it in place of the abstraction.

A different abstraction is certainly permissible, and indeed the definition says "remembers/recalls/recollects facts/memory x2"  A du'u is obviously what one remembers when one remembers a "fact", but is not how one would normally express a "memory" which might indeed be a li'i.  I/we simply had not considered the full possibilities of how one describes a memory, and thus did not specify how to do so in x2.  We had used du'u, and most important, wanted to stress that the place was normally going to be an abstraction."

stevo 

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

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