From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Thu Nov 01 04:13:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 1 Nov 2001 12:13:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 8908 invoked from network); 1 Nov 2001 12:13:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by 10.1.1.220 with QMQP; 1 Nov 2001 12:13:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta3 with SMTP; 1 Nov 2001 12:13:08 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Thu, 1 Nov 2001 11:49:16 +0000 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 01 Nov 2001 12:23:22 +0000 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 12:23:00 +0000 To: pycyn , lojban Subject: Re: [lojban] observatives & a construal of lo'e & le'e Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline From: And Rosta X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin Okay. Fine. This all makes sense & is Right & Proper & as it should be. --And. >>> 11/01/01 01:25am >>> In a message dated 10/31/2001 10:06:38 AM Central Standard Time,=20 arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes: > Treating the observative as a special case is precisely what I object to. > If it is not treated as a special case then there is no observative=20 > convention; > there is just the one rule for interpreting zo'e reagrdless of its=20 > environment > and of whether it is elided. I don't want there to be an observative > convention; I want there to be just the single general rule. This thread= =20 > began by my asking whether there really was this observative convention, > since I had thought there was just the single general rule. >=20 You have it backwards. Someone, years ago, asked "How do we do=20 observatives?" (or words to that a effect -- probably, "How do you yell=20 'Fire' in a burning theater in Loglan?") and that set us off looking for a= =20 good answer. Loglan never did really get a good one for all cases, Lojban= =20 did. But notice what the convention is: "observatieves are x1-less bridi,"= =20 not "x1-less bridi are observatives". That is , here is how to do, when yo= u=20 want, not, if you do this that is what you are stuck with. To be sure, sin= ce=20 (at least in the contextless world of examples) subjectless sentences don't= =20 often occur otherwise, we tend to take them as observatives. But in other= =20 contexts, other uses make more sense sometimes.=20