[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Loglandic N-paradigm. Is it worthy of examination?

I forgot to explain the following.
In English or any other European language you can attach a limited number of prepositions to any verb.
You can say "Give it to me" but can't say "Give it at me". So when learning any European language you just have to memorise what prepositions (or cases) you can use with each verb just like in Lojban you memorise full gismu definitions.
The only difference that prepositions (or cases) are chosen mostly arbitrarily in each language. Sometimes the choice is based on culture-specific metaphors or any other stuff that could probably be found in the history of the language.

Loglan just builds another set of such preposition deviating from the major line of a logical culture-neutral langauge.
Yes, it's naturalistic. No, it's not neutral.
I can see no other way of solving this global problem except either using FA or ignoring sumti places in favor of appropriate BAI.
Anybody suggests the third way?
On Wednesday, July 25, 2012 3:03:53 AM UTC+4, xorxes wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 4:45 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The list of words on
> the linked page is also far from exhaustive and each word is itself
> extremely general.

I believe the list is exhaustive. Every argument place is assigned to
one of the eleven cases, which is why they have to be so general.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/EymluCRVPiMJ.
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.