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

Re: [lojban] {zo'e}

On Sunday, November 22, 2020 5:07:48 PM EST Ilmen wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> 
> I would like to ask you clarifications on the meaning of the cmavo
> {zo'e}, which is defined in the CLL at
> https://lojban.github.io/cll/7/7/index.html
> <https://lojban.github.io/cll/7/7/index.html> as meaning “the obvious
> value”, “whatever I want it to mean but haven’t bothered to figure out,
> or figure out how to express”.
> 
> Let's consider the following three example sentences:
> 
> • [A] {mi tirna zo'e}
> • [B] {mi tirna su'o da}
> • [C] {(da'o) mi tirna ko'a} (usage of a constant {ko'a} which hasn't
> been assigned a value explicitly earlier)
> 
> How does [A] semantically differ from [B] and [C]? (I suspect that the
> two latters ultimately mean the same thing.)
> How [A] should be represented in logical notation?
> {zo'e} cannot be a constant as it changes its referent(s) on each
> occurrence.

{mi tirna zo'e .i mi viska zo'e} is compatible with {mi tirna lo datka .i mi 
viska lo gerku}, but {mi tirna su'o da .i mi viska su'o da} is not.

> The gloss “the obvious value” given in the CLL may lead one to consider
> “you-know-what” or “something which you should be able to identify
> easily” as a possible meaning for {zo'e}, although the second wording
> “whatever I want it to mean but haven’t bothered to figure out, or
> figure out how to express” doesn't seem to support it.
> That second wording doesn't imply that the addressee should be able to
> identify the referents of {zo'e}, but however it seems to imply that the
> speaker has a more precise idea on the referents than with a plain {su'o
> da}, but didn't manage or bother to lay out a more detailed description.
> Therefore, {su'o co'e} (“some thing(s) satisfying the contextually
> salient predicate”) or “some certain thing(s) (known by the speaker but
> not necessarily by the listener)” may also qualify as candidate
> definitions for {zo'e}.
> 
> What in your opinion should be a more precise definition of {zo'e}?

{zo'e} is equivalent to omission (which may require a FA to keep following 
arguments in the same place), except in a relative clause or abstraction, 
where omission may be equivalent to {ke'a} or {ce'u}. Whether there is an 
obvious value is dependent on context and pragmatics.

—le trene cu catra le bomju poi xabju le mlana be le rendargu
—mi viska zo'e
Here {zo'e} could plausibly mean {le trene} or {le bomju} or {lo pixra be le 
fasnu}, but not {lo mlatu}. But if someone takes off my blindfold in a field 
where there are cats, and I say {mi viska zo'e}, {zo'e} likely means {lo 
mlatu}.

Pierre
-- 
li ze te'a ci vu'u ci bi'e te'a mu du
li ci su'i ze te'a mu bi'e vu'u ci



-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/2914956.R1SSoXq267%40puma.