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

Re: [lojban] Re: Aesop's "The Wolf and the Crane"



On Monday, January 28, 2013 4:51:03 PM UTC+4, v4hn wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:46:49AM -0800, la gleki wrote:
> On Monday, January 28, 2013 2:24:47 PM UTC+4, v4hn wrote:
> > "the not-newly-introduced thing that brodas" can still refer to any number
> > of different individuals /in the universe of discourse/, not just the one
> > you're talking about in this specific sentence. {lo bi'u nai} has its
> > uses, but that's not one of them in my opinion.
> >
>
> Yes, but given that there is only one such object in the previous discourse
>  this {bi'unai} refers only to it.
>

I just wanted to point out that this is no general solution.

> > Did you read the last discussion on that? No it does not fix "any",
> > whatever this is supposed to mean.
> >
>
> {lo} does  refer to "any" objects. But this range can be narrowed down to
> an appropriate interval mostly by using UI, VA etc.

Yes, {lo broda} _refers_ to any object that brodas, but it does not
share the _intensional meaning_ of "any object that brodas"!
{lo broda} refers to specific individuals /in the universe of discourse/
(it might introduce them first). On the other hand "any {broda}" does
not necessarily do that(normally it doesn't). You can say "Any apple is sufficient."
or "Give me any apple" without necessarily refering to a specific apple in the UD
or introducing one(John and I have different opinions on the introducing part as far
as I can see).

That's part of the current state of discussion on the "any" matter.
You're welcome to discuss this in the appropriate thread.

Let's assume (roughly) that english "the" has two meanings.

1. "the" = {bi'unai}
2. "the" = {le}, "a"/"any"={lo}

KOhA and BY are alternative ways of saying "the" in it's first meaning. Are you happy with this scheme?



> > If you don't like these, {le} is the best choice you have in my opinion
> > as it is rather close to at least the latter one. (if you think KOhAs do
> > not need to get defined with {goi} also to KOhA)
> > I really don't understand this whole movement that tries to prohibit {le}.
>
> Probably because {le} has shown clear polysemy.
> It was used for things like {le cribe} for teddy-bears as opposed to {lo
> cribe} which were supposed to be Ursidae mammals.
> That's why selpa'i proposed moving {voi} to UI to have a cmavo for
> "described objects".
> We can free {le} from this extraneous meaning. And ok, I'll use it.

Please elaborate on that (maybe in a new thread).
I don't see any polysemy and I don't see any reason
to move {voi} to UI and I don't know what this would/is supposed to fix.
Also I have the feeling you either didn't understand the last part of my mail
or you ignored it.

By the way: After xorlo {lo cribe} _can_, given a context, refer to a teddy-bear,
can't it?

> But if {le} refers to apples that one has in mind who is that "one" who has
> them in mind? Is it the speaker? Then it sounds like an attitudinal.

/WHAT/? What kind of reasoning is that? If anything that is related to the
speaker should be UI, then why is {mi} a KOhA and not UI as well polemic-terminator.

> And next. If {le} refers to things that I have in mind why should we
> suppose that this thing has been previously mentioned?

We don't. The first {lo broda} could in principle also be {le broda} if you
don't want to assert at all, that the object you're refering to actually
brodas. If you want to do that, you have to use {lo} at least once
or need to say something like {le broda ku broda}.
{le} fixes reference, nothing more, nothing less. Whatever {brivla}
comes after is used to inform the listener/reader on who/what is the referent.

> In this case we have to say {le bi'unai} anyway which will save no
> syllables although may be indeed more precise in meaning.

Normally you don't need to be this precise, but if you want to be... sure.


v4hn

--
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.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.