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

Re: [lojban] x3 of dasni



In a message dated 8/8/2002 4:39:55 PM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:


> > I would use {lo'e} there: {ko'a dasni le boxfo lo'e kosta}.
>
>Or, in the less xorxean way, just {lo}. ;-)

But {lo} doesn't work either! {ko'a dasni le boxfo lo kosta}
means that there is _some coat_ such that ko'a wears the blanket
as _that coat_. But that's not what wearing a blanket as a coat
means


Maybe not what it "means" (whatever that means in this context), but it is a certainly true description.  It only sounds weird if you get the idea that you -- or ko'a -- can identify *which* coat it is or if you think it makes a difference which coat it is.  But ignoring those questions is just what particular quantifiers are for.  On the other hand, he can't wear it for lo'e ki\osta, because neither a typical nor an arechetypal coat is something that he could wear, being abstract or supernatural (assuming you don't just mean {lo} by {lo'e}).

<<
> > And how would be "He wears a blanket on his shoulders" then?
>
>Good question!  {ko'a dasni le boxfo vi/gu'a le birka janco}  do not feel
>right.

That's because it would have the sense of "He wears a blanket
on the mountain". Spatial tenses give the location of the event,
in this case the event of wearing.
>>

Well, where else does the event of wearing something on one's shoulders take place other than on one's shoulders.  It may take place some wider places in addition, which are of interest, but they don't negate the first and primal place.  However, we might try another fix -- which is less accurate, but somehow less offensive:
{ko'a dansi le boxfo be/pe vi le birka janco} (I'm not sure just what the difference is between the two alternatives -- {ne}, which is also grammatical, seems to be too casual a connection).

<<
>     ko'a dasni le boxfo le janco taxfu
>or
>     ko'a dasni le boxfo le janco gacri

I think those work, but using {lo'e} instead of {le} in x3.
Even {lo'e janco cpana}.
>>
But 1) it ain't wearable and 2) there ain't one anyhow.  There is neither archeteype nor typical thing to be on a shoulder.  We can pretend there is one as an idiom, but I wonder if we are really ready for idioms here yet, since we often screw up the literals (and idioms seem at this point a copout).

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.