[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[lojban-beginners] Re: POM: the Princess puts her foot down



On Jan 23, 2007, at 4:48 PM, Cortesi wrote:


Explanation of what's going on, and preceding dialog in this scene, at:

[ li'osai ]

I'm still confused about the syntactic roles of selma'o PU. It appears from some examples in the ref.gram. that [bridi] ca [abstraction] is how to say this-while-that, so "fly straight while we can"  is just {sirji vofli ca [lo?] li'i ma'a kakne}. True?

Also confused about NU such as li'i -- when is it needful to have a LE before a NU?

Cmavo in NU take bridi and turn them into an abstraction. For example, {nu} makes events. So, it takes {ta bajra} - {that is running} and turns it into {ta nu bajra} - {that is an event of running}. You need LE cmavo if you want to use it as an argument (sumti).

For example, *{mi tavla do nu bajra} is ungrammatical because both {tavla} and {nu bajra} are selbri, just smashed together. While you can have more than one selbri in a sentence, you need some more cmavo in there to make it work. The correct form is {mi tavla do lo nu bajra} - {I talk to you [about] the event of running}. Here {le} and {nu} both sort of "surround" the selbri {bajra} to transform it into what we want. Since they often come together, you see it written as {lonu} instead of {lo nu} by some Lojbanists.

If you've programmed in C++, think like recasting. Or think of these like a converter pipe fitting/cord/dongle/etc. You started with a selbri (verb) -- then NU turned it into an abstraction but left it a verb. The LE makes it a noun (sumti) so that you can use it as an argument.

mu'o mi'e .aleks.