2010/5/12 tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com>:
> What could be the thematic relationI would say in that scheme x1 is the theme and x2 is the "reference
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thematic_relation) in "purci"?
>
> x1 is in the past of/earlier than/before x2 in time sequence
>
> My first impression was that both x1 and x2 were themes.
point" (not listed among the "major thematic relations" in that page,
but fairly common in Lojban).
Such classifications depend a lot on your choice of semantic theory.
One scheme I like a lot is Rick Morneau's (see the "Verbs" section):
http://www.eskimo.com/~ram/lexical_semantics.html
In that scheme, "purci" would be P/F-s, which means a static relation
with x1 as the patient and x2 as the focus.
I would say the x2 of "purci" has the same thematic role as the x2 of
> (Is that
> semantically possible?) Then I thought x1 could be the source/origin and x2
> the goal/direction. But such directivity may scientifically be false, with
> respect to this:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-symmetry
>
> And perhaps even culturally biased:
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/06/060613185239.htm
>
> What do you think?
"zunle", or the x2 of "cnita". I don't think whether we think of the
past as being in front of us or behind us (or to the right or left or
up or ...) is all that relevant for the thematic roles question.