Re: [lojban] Re: mi kakne lo bajra

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:
> And the idea that one argument of a predicate should be able to define the
> types of the others is interesting, but then you start talking about trying
> to implement a full-fledged type inference system in a spoken language if
> you want everything to really make sense. I don't know if that's reasonable
> (though it would be awesome if we pulled it off.)

That a "ka" argument determines the type of another argument is really
unavoidable.

In "ko'a broda lo ka ce'u brode", assuming that "ce'u" points to the
place where "ko'a" is (and that is determined by the meaning of
"broda") then obviously the type of ko'a will necessarily have to be
the type of the x1 of brode. Otherwise "ko'a" won't be able to have
the property "lo ka ce'u brode".

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.