[lojban-beginners] Re: New lojbanist asking about "po'e" and "lo"

["Adam D. Lopresto" <adam@pubcrawler.org>]

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007, komfo,amonan wrote:

> On 4/22/07, Rob Hughes <robert.c.hughes@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > First, I'm puzzled about the relationship between "po'e" and "po".  I
> > understand that "po'e" can be used for unique inalienable possession.
> > My hands are only mine and can't stop being mine, so I say "lo xance
> > po'e mi".  Is "po'e" used for inalienable possession that isn't
> > unique?  My father can't stop being my father, but he's also my
> > sister's father.  Can I say "lo patfu po'e mi", or should I say "lo
> > patfu pe me" (or "lo mi patfu")?

{po'e} is fine for non-unique inalienable possession.

> The short answer is: { lo patfu be mi }. That pretty much covers most all
> meanings of "my father".

Yes, that's definitely the best way to do it.

> { lo patfu pe mi }/{ lo mi patfu } is common, correct, and less precise.
> 
> I would say { po'e } is definitely wrong and { po } almost definitely wrong,
> because they imply ownership, and it's hard to imagine a scenario in which
> one wishes to assert ownership over one's father.

I'm afraid you're definitely wrong.  Although {po} and {po'e} can be used for
possession, they are much more broad than that.  {lo patfu po mi} and {lo
patfu po'e} are both absolutely fine.  The Lojban words are about association,
not possession.

> There are perhaps some cultures where some familial relationships have an
> ownership dynamic. But the place structures of those gismu release us from
> such thorny issues.
> 
> Remember that although English bids us say "my book", "my novel", "my
> liver", "my father", Lojban urges us to make finer distinctions.

Allows, not urges.  
-- 
Adam Lopresto
http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/

Note: No Microsoft programs were used in the creation or distribution of
this message. If you are using a Microsoft program to view this message,
be forewarned that I am not responsible for any harm you may encounter as
a result.