Re: [lojban] Active-stative?

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Michael Turniansky
<mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
>  Here's one I've thought about.  Is there any more meaning to "xe
> ciska fu mi"  more than "mi ciska"?  I deliberately brought in a
> conversion to a place that doesn't nominally exist, but then ignored
> it.

Or even "se blanu ti", which doesn't even need FA.

If those were common, one may have an argument for ergative-absolutive
alignment, although I think the fact that one needs a conversion still
makes it a weak argument.

> However does the mere fact of converting it bring it into some
> sort of quasi-existence, despite it not being defined?  My intuition
> would be that it's equivalent to "mi ciska do'e zo'e", but even then,
> I don't know if that's meaningful.

I think I'm happy with "se blanu ti" meaning exactly the same as "ti blanu".

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.