From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Fri Sep 21 17:33:22 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 22 Sep 2001 00:32:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 40015 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2001 00:32:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by 10.1.1.220 with QMQP; 22 Sep 2001 00:32:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta05-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.45) by mta1 with SMTP; 22 Sep 2001 00:33:22 -0000 Received: from andrew ([62.255.40.171]) by mta05-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20010922003319.TUSY20588.mta05-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew>; Sat, 22 Sep 2001 01:33:19 +0100 Reply-To: To: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" , "lojban" Subject: RE: [lojban] Dumb answers to good questions Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 01:32:37 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010920174409.00e35d60@pop.cais.com> Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" lojbab: > At 01:59 PM 9/20/01 +0100, And Rosta wrote: > >So the general Lojban strategy I'd propose would be twofold > >(a) a method of isolating the focused item along the lines sketched > >above, > > We have a prenex approach to this where it is a sumti you want to draw > focus to, as well as fronting and trailing markedly, which brings focus by > the marking. What'd help here would be Lojban translations of It was John that Bill hit It was Bill that hit John What John did was hit Bill What John did to Bill was hit him What happened to Bill was John hit him It is John and Bill that are respectively x, y such that x hit y etc. -- Using structural methods of isolating the focused phrase. > ba'e of course directly adds emphasis, but does not indicate why, which > draws focus. Not bad, but there are other reasons for emphasis besides focus, so ba'e will no do as the focus marker. > > (b) an optional UI to mark the focused item -- the equivalent > >of English intonation's focal stress ("Bob HIT Bill", etc.). > > The closest we have to this beside ba'e is bi'u/bi'unai which were > originally intended by Colin Fine who proposed them to deal with one > particular reason for focus. bi'u(nai) is for given/new rather than for focus. While focused information is new, not all new information is focused. So nor will bi'u do as the focus marker. More generally, though, as with po'o this is a 'problem' that should be fixed by logical/structural means rather than primarily by a discursive. --And.