[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban-beginners] Possession with "le le ..."
Excellent point.
My understanding of NU is that it is specifically designed to wrap
up a bridi into a sumti, which as you outline below conflicts with
my understanding of the design for CU.
Is this the only case where you can do this? Are we looking at a
design decision specifically for NU that "takes precedence" (as it
were) over CU, or can this occur elsewhere too?
-Alan
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:59:55AM -0400, Luke Bergen wrote:
> Hmm, I guess it seems kind of like we do things differently in different
> situations.
> {lo} converts a selbri to a sumti
> {cu} says "here comes the next possible selbri" (basically it's a shortcut
> for "add all terminators until we get to a place where the next thing to
> come is a selbri)
> Thus, things like {lo nu lo gerku cu citka cu cinri} are valid. � The
> first {cu} says "ok, here comes a selbri". � Then the second {cu} says
> "ok, here comes the next valid one". � Each time, it says "the next valid
> place where a selbri makes sense, that's coming next".
> Another example: lu lo gerku cu citka cu se cusku mi. � This is valid, the
> second {cu} says "ok, the next selbri is expected after we have hit a
> {li'u} so stick the {li'u} in and take the next selbri
> But in {lo lo blabi cu gerku} it seems like it's not behaving the same
> way. � It seems like it's not valid to read this as "take the next selbri
> and make it a sumti: (take the next selbri and make it a sumti: (blabi)
> <here comes a selbri> (gerku) )
> It seems like the "selbri" that {lo} is converting is not really a "true"
> selbri but something else.
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:35 AM, .alyn.post.
> <[1]alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org> wrote:
>
> Ah! ok. � Thank you Luke, let me try again:
>
> The technical reason is that CU separates the preceding sumti from
> the selbri that follows, and a nested LE is part of the sumti.
>
> If a cu were permitted in the case described, I believe this would
> be valid:
>
> � le le broda cu brode cu brodi
>
> And would be identical to:
>
> � le le broda ku brode cu brodi
>
> I suspect this is not permitted for the following reasons, though
> I'm speculating:
>
> � * CU is designed as an aide to the listener in finding the selbri,
> � so permitting it in a nested LE opens the possibility of having
> � multipe CU in a bridi, weakening the ability to find the selbri.
> � * KU is the terminator to use when terminating a nested LE. � While
> � you could *also* unambigiously permit other terminators, this
> � isn't the only scenario where this is true. � If you permitted
> � every terminator that wasn't unambiguous you'd still have a
> � parseable grammar, but one which would be more difficult to
> � understand: there would be increased cognitive load in determining
> � what is being terminated, as you no longer have a direct
> � correspondence between the opening and closing selma'o.
>
> -Alan
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:15:34AM -0400, Luke Bergen wrote:
> > � � I think the question though is, if {cu} means "separate selbri
> from
> > � � preceding sumti" then, why can't you do {le le ninmu cu klama}
> where this
> > � � is interpreted as: (something that goes in x1 of: ( something that
> goes in
> > � � x1 of: (ninmu <cu so break out of this sumti and start talking
> about a
> > � � selbri>) comes).
> > � � Ok, I don't know how to describe that better. Basically, if {cu}
> says "ok,
> > � � we're done with this sumti, now do a selbri" but that itself is
> happening
> > � � inside a LE, then why can't the following selbri be converted by
> the outer
> > � � LE?
> >
> > � � On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:06 AM, .alyn.post.
> > � � <[1][2]alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org> wrote:
> >
> > � � � On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 07:49:21AM -0700, Ben Foppa wrote:
> > � � � > Lojban for Beginners says "...consider how you would say le
> tamne pe
> > � � � > le ninmu klama 'the woman traveller's cousin' with this kind
> of
> > � � � > nesting. You could flip it around as le le ninmu klama tamne
> � but
> > � � � > then, how can you tell where the 'possessor' ends and where
> the
> > � � � > 'possessee' begins?"
> > � � � >
> > � � � > I wonder why a construct like "le le ninmu klama cu tamne"
> wouldn't
> > � ? � > work, to separate the argument to the first "le" (which is
> "ninmu
> > � � � > klama"), from the argument to the second "le" (which is
> "tamne"). Is
> > � � � > the purpose of "cu" not simply to separate two selbri when
> they are
> > � � � > consecutive arguments, or when one is the argument to another?
> > � � � >
> >
> > � � � You can use {ku} to terminate the inner {le}:
> >
> > � � � le le ninmu klama ku tamne
> >
> > � � � -alyn
> > � � � --
> > � � � .i ma'a lo bradi ku penmi gi'e du
> > � � � --
> > � � � You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> Google
> > � � � Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
> > � � � To post to this group, send email to
> > � � � [2][3]lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
> > � � � To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > � � � [3][4]lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > � � � For more options, visit this group at
> > � � � [4][5]http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.
> >
> > � � --
> > � � You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> > � � "Lojban Beginners" group.
> > � � To post to this group, send email to
> [6]lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
> > � � To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > � � [7]lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > � � For more options, visit this group at
> > � � [8]http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.
> >
> > References
> >
> > � � Visible links
> > � � 1. mailto:[9]alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org
> > � � 2. mailto:[10]lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
> > � � 3. mailto:[11]lojban-beginners%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> > � � 4. [12]http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en
> --
> .i ma'a lo bradi ku penmi gi'e du
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
> [13]lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [14]lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> [15]http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.
>
> --
> 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.
>
> References
>
> Visible links
> 1. mailto:alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org
> 2. mailto:alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org
> 3. mailto:lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
> 4. mailto:lojban-beginners%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> 5. http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en
> 6. mailto:lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
> 7. mailto:lojban-beginners%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> 8. http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en
> 9. mailto:alyn.post@lodockikumazvati.org
> 10. mailto:lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
> 11. mailto:lojban-beginners%252Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> 12. http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en
> 13. mailto:lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com
> 14. mailto:lojban-beginners%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> 15. http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en
--
.i ma'a lo bradi ku penmi gi'e du
--
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.