[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Why is there so much irregularity in cmavo/gismu?
At 02:08 PM 11/15/01 +0000, And Rosta wrote:
>>> Rob Speer <rob@twcny.rr.com> 11/14/01 10:11pm >>>
#> {xu} really ought to have been
#> in JAhA (the ja'a/na selmaho), so this is an example of a misplaced
#>cmavo rather than an example of a totally screwed up selmaho system.
#
#If xu were in JAhA, you would need a different word to question a
#specific part of the sentence (a feature of {xu} which is largely
#unexplored).
If it makes sense to ask a yes/no question about a specific part of
the sentence then it also makes sense to affirm or negate a
specific part of the sentence. Just as xo behaves like a PA and
ma behaves like a KOhA, so xu should behave like a JAhA.
No, that is an argument for all the JAhA to behave like a UI, except that
then we would lose the capability for logical negation.
My answer is that the strict question which a JAhA answers is not "xu", but
ja'axu or naxu, but we interpret sentence scope xu to be the same as ja'axu.
lojbab
--
lojbab lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org