[lojban] Re: jordis

[Martin Bays <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

* Wednesday, 2004-10-20 at 11:18 -0700 - Jorge Llamb?as <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar>:

> 
> --- Martin Bays wrote:
> > {le ba'e mi speni}, {ba'e le mi speni} and {le mi ba'e speni}
> > correspond
> > respectively to "*my* wife", "*my wife*" and "my *wife*".
> 
> {le ba'e mi speni} and {le mi ba'e speni}, yes.
> 
> But {ba'e le mi speni} doesn't really have a direct correspondence
> in English. It's more like "*the* wife of mine". {ba'e} emphasizes 
> the very next word, not the following phrase. Since the 
> distinguishing feature of {le} is specificity, that's what {ba'e} 
> would be emphasizing here: not just any old wife of mine but *the* 
> one(s) I have in mind.

Really? I can believe that that's the usage, and the Book isn't completely
clear on this - but it does say:

"""
Alternatively, the ``ba'e'' can be moved to a position before the
``la'', which in effect emphasizes the whole construct ``la djordj.'':

11.5)    mi viska ba'e la djordj.
     I saw [emphasis] the-one-named ``George''.
     I saw George.
"""

This led me to believe that {ba'e} works like UI in this respect.