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

Re: [lojban] Re: sumti-raising cmavo thingy



b
​lanu blanu:​



Em terça-feira, 12 de julho de 2016 13:08:51 UTC+3, la uakci escreveu:
Hi!

The other day, I was thinking, "wouldn't it be useful to have a sumti-raising infix cmavo?".
In other words, wouldn't it be useful to have a cmavo that goes between the raised sumti and the rest.

la solpa'i / la selpa'i / la me zi'o already discussed it over on his blog:

Having said that, there is this fancy word, {zo'ei} (of LAhE).
It's roughly equivalent to {zo'e pe}, but more of a single word than two.
While {tu'a}, {jai} and {kai'a} (from the blog post) relate to a sumti and an event,
{zo'ei} is a relation between a sumti and something related to it.

This brings us to metonyms.

Why is "sumti-raising" is in the topic? :)
Metonymy and raising are separate beasts.

​1) Not really. Metonymy relates an object to something related to that object (well duh),
and sumti-raising relates an object to an event related to that object. Thus, sumti-raising
is a subset of metonymy.​
2) The first email reads, "This brings us to metonyms", meaning that the topic moved from sumti-
-raising to metonymy. Oops. The "parallel" topic to the main one turned out to be the main one,
​my bad.

Anyway, QUESTIONS!​ Please contribute to the topic.

~ mi'e la uakci mu'o re'i

 
 
Metonyms are somewhat related to metaphors;
they are the usage of an object in a sentence instead of something of that object.
For example, in the sentence "Orders came in from the office", even though "office" really stands for "boss" (or something), "office" is used because it has some relation to "boss".

If we were to translate this sentence to Lojban with the metonym usage, we'd get
{ lo briju cu minde }.
Because Lojban is a logical language to some extent, it's incorrect to say that -- offices don't give orders.
Just like { mi cizra }, which needs a {jai} (because I'm not an event), { lo briju cu minde } should also be fixed with a {jai}-like cmavo, X. X, contrary to {jai}, would be in SE (because we don't need to use the {jai}-plus-sumtcita feature).
In order to fix the example, we'd say {zo'ei lo briju cu minde} (which is not very natural), or, using X, {lo briju cu X minde}.

Explaining it with a simple relation might help:

 tu'a : jai : (kai'a) ::
zoi'e :  X  :    Y

It's also worth considering the Y, because it could be useful.

~ mi'e la uakci mu'o

--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.