Re: [lojban] Re: {le} in xorlo

[Daniel Brockman <dbrockman@gmail.com>]

2010/4/24 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Daniel Brockman <dbrockman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I actually think zo'e should not include zi'o.  My basic assumption is
>> that zo'e should always be exactly equivalent to leaving the sumti
>> out.
>
> Ideally, that's how it should be. But in practice, some gismu have
> such terrible place structures that the alternatives are (1) accept
> the official place structure and assume that the unwanted place is
> filled with a silent "zi'o" (an explicit zi'o has the opposite effect
> of calling attention to the place instead of keeping it out of mind),
> or (2) use the gismu as if it had a more sensible place structure, in
> which case "zi'o" is not needed, and there is no need for a silent
> "zo'e" to be standing for it because there is no place there to begin
> with. Personally, I go with (2), and so I don't really need "zo'e" to
> stand for "zi'o". Not that any of this has any practical consequences
> one way or the other, it's just how someone can explain it to
> themselves.

Good point.  I too prefer (2) (no pun intended).

>> And I don't think {klama} can mean {klama zi'o}.  That's because zi'o
>> alters the predicate fundamentally.  So it's maybe no longer {klama}.
>>
>> For the same reason, I think {klama} should not include {to'e klama}.
>
> What's "to'e klama"? Are you thinking of come/go?

No, I just picked {klama} at random --- bad example, I guess.
What I meant was just that I consider {to'e broda} to be more
or less a completely new predicate (for any {broda}).

-- 
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.