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

Re: [lojban] cmevla as a class of brivla

John E Clifford wrote:

And, of course, what the current logic suggests is that {la} works like
{zo} to convert a word into a name, not of the word itself but of
something else, not naturally, but by convention.


la'o is the cmavo that is defined to turn a string into a name.

la is not la'o and has numerous grammatical distinctions


That is, in {la
tsani}, {tsani} is not a brivla but just a string of letters/sounds
which, the {la} says, are being used as a name for someone/thing.


Then it is being misused.  Sorry.


Those exceptions are in fact significant - they are examples of the
brivla (or whatever word) being taken as a string of symbols/sounds that
exists on it own regardless of which word or kind of word that it is.


zo and la'o are for treating words as mere strings.


But that isn't the case for Lojban.

How not?  cmevla certainly do that.  Or is your point that they are not
taken as a string of symbols, but rather as a *word*.
Grammatically, "la" attaches to words, not merely to strings of symbols. Those words are parsed according to their membership in a selma'o, and have the ordinary grammar of that selma'o. 


But, on the other
hand, the {tsani} in {zo tsani} is taken as a word as well (it has to be
proper Lojban, after all) and as a name for itself.
It has to be a morphological single word, but it is not considered to be a part of a particular selma'o when used with zo.
Here are the relevant YACC representations, found in the baselined grammar in the back of CLL. 



ZO_quote_435  	:	ZO_626  any_word_698
ZOI_quote_434 : ZOI_627 any_word_698 /*pause*/ anything_699 /*pause*/ any_word_698 

LOhU_quote_436  	:	LOhU_569  any_words_697  LEhU_565
	;
Notice that the thing constituting the quoted text is NOT classified as a selma'o. 

Now look at what constitutes a LA sumti:

sumti_G_97  	: ...
	|	anaphora_400
	|	LA_499  cmene_404
	|	LA_499  relative_clauses_121   cmene_404
	|	LI_489  MEX_310   LOhO_gap_472
	|	description_110
	|	quote_arg_432


cmene_404  	:	cmene_A_405
	|	cmene_A_405  free_modifier_32
	;
cmene_A_405  	:	CMENE_518  /* pause */
	|	cmene_A_405  CMENE_518  /* pause*/

and we see that a cmene must be of the selma'o "cmene"
whereas a description using LA to make it a name is NOT attaching to a name, but to a description (sumti-tail) of exactly the grammatical content of a LE description. 

description_110  	:	LA_499  sumti_tail_111  gap_450
	|	LE_488  sumti_tail_111   gap_450
"la tsani" is thus in Lojban a description used as a name, and not a name in itself. It is not merely a string (anything_699) or any Lojban word (any_word_698). 



 > And this is where I disagree.

Second!  {la} deracinates {tsani}, so that it has historic, but not
linguistic, connections with its brivla existence.
The formal grammar, which is the baselined standard, is not merely historic. It defines what the language is (which had better be what "linguistic" means, at least in part. 


And dotside or no dotside, I will never accept someone's choice of name
to be "la" %^)

That seems a bit narrow of you,
I am extremely narrow minded with regard to the baseline. And regardless of all the debate since then, the baseline defines the language. 


So far we have, I think, limited to brivla and possibly bridi
tails of various sorts and certainly have talked about full bridi ("His
enemies fear even his horses", the sentence behind the abbreviated
"Afraid-of-horses").  So farm cmavo and miscellaneous strings that are
of no part of speech have been avoided (or at least frowned upon).
The above selections from the formal grammar include all of the things that one can label "names", though perhaps the English word could encompass all of the family of "vocatives" as well 


vocative_35  	:	DOI_415  selbri_130  DOhU_gap_457
	|	DOI_415  selbri_130   relative_clauses_121   DOhU_gap_457
	|	DOI_415  relative_clauses_121   selbri_130   DOhU_gap_457
| DOI_415 relative_clauses_121 selbri_130 relative_clauses_121 DOhU_gap_457 
	|	DOI_415  cmene_404  DOhU_gap_457
	|	DOI_415  cmene_404  relative_clauses_121   DOhU_gap_457
	|	DOI_415  relative_clauses_121   cmene_404  DOhU_gap_457
| DOI_415 relative_clauses_121 cmene_404 relative_clauses_121 DOhU_gap_457 
	|	DOI_415  sumti_90   DOhU_gap_457
	|	DOI_415  DOhU_gap_457


lojbab
--
Bob LeChevalier    lojbab@lojban.org    www.lojban.org
President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@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.