Comments on place structure paper

[Colin Fine <C.J.Fine@bradford.ac.uk>]

Herewith some comments on the Place Structure paper.
Despite many detailed criticisms, I found the paper
very much worthwhile.

I agree with Nick on the introductory material.  (I tried to 
translate the first couple of paragraphs into lojban, and 
got hopelessly stuck!)


> The "x1...x5" indicates that "klama" is a five-place predicate, and show
                     ^ "indicate" (or "shows" later)
>the natural order (as assigned by the language engineers) of those
>places:  agent, destination, origin, route, means.

++++++>
2.3)	mi la bastn. cu klama la .atlantas. le dargu le karce
	I to-Boston go from-Atlanta via-the road using-the car.

All of the variant forms in this section and following sections can be
used to place emphasis on the part or parts which have been moved out
of their standard places.  Thus, Example 2.2 places emphasis on the
selbri (because it is at the end); Example 2.3 emphasizes "la bastn.",
because it has been moved before the selbri.
>+++++++

(Flame on) The su'epa way of showing emphasis in lojban is by using 
the word ba'e. 
I agree that there may be pragmatic emphasis in variant word orders, but
I object to your stating them as fact in a technical paper. 
There are other reasons besides emphasis for adjusting the order -
notably 'heavy clause movement'.

When we have reasonably fluent lojban speakers from a variety of 
dissimilar native languages we may start observing describable
pragmatics. Until then they do not belong. 
(Flame off)

Similarly,
+++++++>
...  Such a bridi, with empty x1, is called an "observative",
because it calls on the listener to observe something in the environment
which would belong in the x1 place.
>+++++++

That is one use of it, but this does not adequately describe what has 
become a very common use of syntactic observatives, viz omitting
the x1 because it is obvious or uninteresting. Are these then to be
illegitimate?
It is particularly odd that you say this, since two paragraphs later you say
++++++++++>
Suppose the speaker desires to omit a place other than the x1 place?
(Presumably it is obvious or, for one reason or another, not worth
saying.) 
>++++++++
but seem unwilling to allow the x1 the same privilege.

> 3.2)	fa mi klama fe le zdani be mi poi nurma vau fi la nuIORK.
                                       ^ be'o

Section 4:
+++++++++>
Here are the place structures of "se klama":

	x1 is the destination of x2's going from x3 via x4 using x5

and "te klama":

	x1 is the origin of x2's going to x3 via x4 using x5

and "ve klama":

	x1 is the route of x2's going to x3 from x4 via x5

and "xe klama":

	x1 is the means used by x2 in going to x3 from x4 via x5

Note that the place structure numbers in each case continue to be listed
in the usual order, x1 to x5.
>++++++++

Am I going mad, or are you?
I make them:

"te klama"
	x1 is the origin of a going to x2 by goer x3 via x4 using x5
"ve klama"
	x1 is the route of a going to x2 from x3 by goer x4 using x5
"xe klama"
	x1 is the means used to go to x2 from x3 via x4, by goer x5


>The most important use of conversion is in the construction of descriptions.
I might quibble with this.

+++++++++>
The place structure of "se zdani" is therefore:

	x1 is the inhabitant of house (etc.) x2

Consequently, Example 4.7 means:

	I am the inhabitant of the blue house which is this thing.

Conversion applied to only part of a tanru has subtler effects which are
explained elsewhere.
>+++++++
I would prefer 'x1 is an inhabitant ...'
I am unhappy with the gloss to 4.8 (not 4.7) because the English is too
specific about the relationship of blanu and zdani.  I think I echo 
Nick's concerns.

++++++>
  For example, the
place structure of "se te klama" is achieved by exchanging the x1 and
x2 place of "te klama", producing:

	x1 goes from x2 to x3 via x4 using x5

On the other hand, "te se klama" has a place structure derived from swapping
the x1 and x3 places of "se klama":

	x1 is the origin of x2's going to x3 via x4 using x5

which is quite different.
>+++++++
"se te klama" is
	x1 is the destination, x2 the origin of x3's going via x4 using x5
The other gloss is correct.

++++++++>

6.4)	bloti teka'a la nuIORK.
	[Observative:] is-a-boat with-origin New York
	A boat from New York!
>+++++++
I suggest pointing out the difference between this and
	bloti ra'i la nuIORK.
which might be translated the same way in English.


>6.6)	[to be supplied]
Try:
	mi catlu love'a xisymalsi xeka'a le relxilma'e
	I look-at the medium-space-interval churches by (travelling) means the 
bicycle
	I am on a cycle tour, looking at churches.

++++>
All BAI cmavo have the form CV'V or CVV.  Most of them are CV'V, where
the C is the first consonant of the corresponding gismu and the two Vs are
the two vowels of the gismu.  The table in Section 17 show the exceptions.
                                                         ^ shows
>++++++++

++++++++>
7.2)	la djan. cpacu le pamoi seljinga ki'u le nu la djan. jinga
	John gets the first prize with-justification the event-of John wins.
	John got the first prize because he won.
>+++++++
I'm not happy with this example, because of two lexical choices (which 
don't affect the point at issue):
'pamoi seljinga' - pamoi is strictly accurate, but I don't like it.
'jinga' - This means 'win a prize in some competition' not 'come first in
a competition', so the justification is a bit thin. Insofar as there is 
causation it looks more like ni'i,  but it doesn't follow anyway.
Try
	la djan. jinga le ralju ki'u lenu la djan. sadrai jivna

+++++++>
7.4)	la sokrates. morsi binxo ni'i le nu la sokrates. remna
	Socrates dead-became with-logical-justification Socrates is-human.
	Socrates died because Socrates is human.
>++++++
ni'i is only valid here if it follows a proposition sucha s
	ro remna cu morsi binxo
Otherwise it's a boring old rinka.

++++++++>
8.9)	li ny. du li vo
		.ini'ibo li ny. du li re su'i re
	the number n = the-number 4.
		Motivated-by the-number n = the-number 2 + 2.
	n = 4 because n = 2 + 2.
>++++++++
Necessitated-by

++++++++>
10.7)	la frank. nelci la betis. ne semau la meiris.
	Frank likes Betty, which-is more-than Mary.
	Frank likes Betty more than (he likes) Mary.
>++++++++
I can see no justification for that '(he likes)'. 
'la betis. ne semau la meiris.'
is a self-contained argument, whose meaning does 
not depend on the bridi it happens to be part of.

'Frank likes Betty, who exceeds Mary in some 
unspecified way.'  The unspecified way could
be the degree of Frank's liking, but it need not
be.

++++++++++>
11.8)	mi bevri le dakli .eseri'ake bevri le gerku .adu'ibo le mlatu
	I carry the sack and [effect] (the cat and/or [equal] the dog).
	I carry the sack, and as a result the cat or the dog equally.
>+++++++++
      mi bevri le dakli .eseri'ake le gerku .adu'ibo le mlatu 

++++++++>
		rai	traji		also uses 2nd consonant of gismu
		sau	srasu
		tai	tamsmi		also based on lujvo, not gismu
>+++++++++
	'sarcu' !

========================================================================
There are no extraordinary people.  | Colin Fine
Whoever tells you otherwise is      |  Dept of Computing
      lying to you.                 |   University of Bradford
There are only ever ordinary people,|    Bradford, W. Yorks, England
Who do what they do -               |      BD7 1DP
The extraordinary thing is the      | Tel: 0274 733680 (h), 383915 (w)
  extraordinary things that they do!|   c.j.fine@bradford.ac.uk
                                    |   (cfine@cix.compulink.co.uk;
 .e'o ko sarji la lojban.           |      cjfine@gn.apc.org)
========================================================================