[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban-beginners] Tanru-internal connectives, place structure, non-sense
On 08.11.2013 23:36, iesk wrote:
But it
seems to me that {ti blanu je zdani} is *not* a good example sentence
in the reference grammar.
I always treated it like this: When one predicate has more places than
the other, the {je} connection only affects those places that "overlap".
In this example, blanu1 and zdani1 are connected, but zdani2 is not,
because there is no blanu2. Without this, the example would indeed be
questionable, but tanru internal connectives would then be even more
useless, so I don't recommend this interpretation.
(Since 'the x2 of a one-place brivla' is a separate issue, separately
discussed, that need not distract us here, I'll stick to the {sutra
je
jipci} example.)
Probably a good idea.
la gejyspa ku cusku di'e
"mi sutra je jipci" is a perfectly fine sentence to say
I think it's nonsense.
I agree that 'I am fast, and a chicken' is what that sentence is
probably supposed to mean, and what will be understood by a
co-operative listener. But then, the speaker should have said {mi
sutra gi'e jipci} or so.
Exactly.
I don't think {mi sutra je jipci} makes
sense.
Me neither. It would be hard to find anything that both {se sutra} and
{se jipci}.
If it did, that would mean that places could be pragmatically
cancelled out/filled with {zi'o} … or {no da}, whatever.
{zi'o} might be debatable, but {no da} is out of the question. There
cannot be a hidden negation in a {zo'e}.
But I think a
legitimate Lojbanic reaction (besides {ki'a}) to {mi sutra je jipci}
would always be {sutra je jipci ma}—the second argument is still
there
and can always be made explicit. Otherwise, we'd end up with place
structure ambiguity in ellipsis sentences, wouldn't we?
My tentative conclusion is that CLL #12.12 might better be listed as
an erratum. Opinions?
I think it's fine to use tanru internal connectives when all the places
do line up. And I use the rule that "everything lines up with a
non-existent place". My rationale is that the alternative would be
useless.
Also, I think it's important to make a difference between connected
seltau units, and connected tertau units. This thread is only about the
latter. The expansion for connected seltau units is deliberately vague,
and usually gets expanded into two seperate tanru. But this is probably
for another thread.
mu'o mi'e la selpa'i
--
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.