[lojban-beginners] Re: spofu pemci

["Turniansky, Michael" <MICHAEL.A.TURNIANSKY@saic.com>]

Robin writes:
> 
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 12:12:57PM -0300, Jorge Llambías wrote:
> > I don't think the tanru {dansu je sanga je gleki} can have as its
> > x2 a conflation of the x2's of dansu, sanga and gleki. What would
> > that mean? The place structure of a tanru is the place structure
> > of its last component.
> 
> I disagree.  If there were a following bit, say {dansu je sange je
> gleki broda}, then I'd agree, but I see no tanru connection there,
> only logical connection, albeit of tanru type.  From the CLL,
> chapter 5:
> 
>     It may be used to partly resolve the ambiguity of simple tanru:
> 
>     6.7)  ta blanu je zdani
>      that is-blue and is-a-house
> 
>     definitely refers to something which is both blue and is a
>     house, and not to any of the other possible interpretations of
>     simple ``blanu zdani''.
> 
> Therefore, each element of a tanru JA is equivalent to every other
> element.  I don't see how this gives the last one primacy, despite
> that being the tanru default.


  And up until today, I would have agreed with you, but after reading what Xorxes said, I read further in the CLL and in Chapter 14, they give that exact sentence and translation in 12.1, but then in 12.6/12.7 they say:

	the rule of expansion into separate bridi simply does not always work 	for tanru connection. Supposing Alice to be a person who lives in blue 	houses, then 
	12.6)    la .alis. cu blanu je zdani prenu
    	Alice is-a (blue and house) type-of-person.

	would be true, because tanru grouping with a jek has higher precedence 	than unmarked tanru grouping, but: 
	12.7)    la .alis. cu blanu prenu
      	  .ije la .alis. cu zdani prenu
    	Alice is-a blue person,
      	  and Alice is-a house person.

	is probably false, because the blueness is associated with the house, 	not with Alice, even leaving aside the question of what it means to 	say ``Alice is a blue person''. (Perhaps she belongs to the Blue team, 	or is wearing blue clothes.) The semantic ambiguity of tanru make such 	logical manipulations impossible.
> 
> It's worth noting, however, that both xorxes and I are talking out
> of our assses: this case is *not* explicitely covered in the CLL,
> and I think that's OK.  This is a case where Bob would probably say
> that we should let usage decide, and this is enough of a corner case
> that I'm fine with that.
> 
> -Robin
> 
            --gejyspa