Subject: Re: [lojban] pe BAI <sumti> on tense markers

From: Pierre Abbat <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:53:48 -0400

On Monday 27 August 2001 16:30, Invent Yourself wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> > I've figured out what "pe BAI" means, as opposed to "be BAI", in at least
> > one instance, "ba'i".
> >
> > a. ko'e zbasu le dinju lo staku be seba'i lo rokci
> > (The brick was made of something else instead of stone, maybe.)
> > b. ko'e zbasu le dinju lo staku pe seba'i lo rokci
> > (The tower was made of brick instead of of stone.
>
> Why do you see these as being any different?

For a to make sense, "ko'i staku seba'i lo rokci" has to make sense - "seba'i 
lo rokci" is modifying the brivla "staku". In b, it's modifying the sumti "lo 
staku".

In b, stone is substituted with brick in making the building. In a, stone is 
substituted with something in the relationship "something is ceramic made by 
someone of some material in some shape", irrespective of the relationship 
"they make a building out of ceramic".

> This is the right grammar -
>
> > I was going to say "construction", but it wasn't the right construction,
> > because God was displeased with it.)
> > c. ko'e zbasu le dinju lo staku seba'i lo rokci
> > (The making of the building was a substitute for a stone. This is
> > unclear, and might be interpreted as b or as "ko'e zbasu le dinju,
> > peseba'i lo rokci, le staku".)
> >
> > To say "instead" without saying instead of what, one can say
> > "peseba'iku".
> >
> > In the Book (or at least the webpages) there is a sentence in which a BAI
> > phrase semantically modifies not a verb, not a noun, but a tense marker:
>
> Verb? Noun?

Brivla, sumti. BTW, what are the Lojban words for "verb" and "noun", and also 
"adverb" and "adjective" for which there is nothing similar?

phma