Subject: Re: [lojban] Dumb answers to good questions

From: And Rosta <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 16:56:24 +0100

>>> "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]> 09/24/01 10:28pm #>>>
#At 10:50 PM 9/23/01 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
#>Bob LeChevalier (lojbab) scripsit:
#>
#> > OK, then bi'u/bi'unai is indeed the focus marker, since it marks the piece
#> > of key information as being either new or old information. Just 
#> marking it
#> > says that it is key, of course.
#>
#>I don't think so: consider "It was George who hit the (bi'u) man."
#
#I don't get it. You could literally translate that into Lojban, with the 
#bi'u as marked, but why is the bi'u there if NOT to mark focus, and if "It 
#was George" that is the focus, and presumably the key information, why is 
#it *not* marked - I mean if the listener already knows it, it isn't that 
#important, and "the man" presumably is; and if the listener doesn't know 
#it, and you are bothering to mark bi'u, then it should be marked.

The example should be "hit a/this bi'u man" or "hit the bi'unai man"

George is focus. 'a'/'bi'u' indicates that the man has been referred to 
already and is not being introduced into the discourse for the first
time.

You add bi'u(nai) to guide the addressee in identifying the referent.

--And.