Re: [lojban] Re: sipna selsanga

[John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net>]

--- Theodore Reed <treed@surreality.us> wrote:

> On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 08:20 -0700, John E
> Clifford wrote:
> > Curiosity: what is the intended difference
> > between {lo melbi} in line 1 (and 3) and
> {tu'a lo
> > melbi} in line 2 (need for syllables aside)?
> 
> I intended this translation:
> 
> Have beautiful dreams, dear one.
> Dream of beautiful things.
> Have beautiful dreams, dear one.
> I am looking after you, beloved.
> 
> So the difference there is whether it is the
> dream which is beautiful,
> or the thing dreamed about.
Oh! Now I have moved from curiosity to
puzzlement.  How does {ko senva lo melbi} mean
"Dream beautiful dreams" as opposed to "Dream
about beautiful things" (assuming it can mean the
latter, of course).  Of course, just what "have
beautiful dreams" means other than "dream about
beautiful things" may be problematic.  But {ko
senva co melbi} is safer, though it may means
something else again (tanru are so indefinite). 
As for {ko senva tu'a lo melbi}, it fits better
with the official definition of {senva}, which
makes {senva2} take an abstraction (event or
proposition or idea), in this case, one involving
(a) beautiful thing(s) -- the old standard form
for "dream about beautiful things," which in
xorlo is {senva lo melbi} (with all the
accompanying problems about unmarked intensional
contexts).  It was where you stood on that issue
that I was trying to find out, and I must admit
that on that -- as well as on just how what you
did did what you intended -- I am no clearer than
I was originally.