From rob@twcny.rr.com Tue Nov 13 18:07:05 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rob@twcny.rr.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 14 Nov 2001 02:07:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 80981 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 02:07:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m10.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 14 Nov 2001 02:07:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailout5.nyroc.rr.com) (24.92.226.169) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Nov 2001 02:07:05 -0000 Received: from mail1.twcny.rr.com (mail1-1 [24.92.226.139]) by mailout5.nyroc.rr.com (8.11.6/Road Runner 1.12) with ESMTP id fAE271h04843 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:07:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from riff ([24.92.246.4]) by mail1.twcny.rr.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-59787U250000L250000S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:06:56 -0500 Received: from rob by riff with local (Exim 3.32 #1 (Debian)) id 163pRG-0000RZ-00 for ; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:06:06 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:06:06 -0500 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Why is there so much irregularity in cmavo/gismu? Message-ID: <20011113210606.B1673@twcny.rr.com> Reply-To: rob@twcny.rr.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com From: Rob Speer X-Yahoo-Profile: squeekybobo On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 08:38:26PM -0500, Craig wrote: > An explanation of why xu and .ui are different grammatically. > > Consider a hypothetical person - we'll call him Jimbob, a good generic > lojbanist name - who comes to me to ask about lojban. First he asks how to > say "I go." I tell him you say "mi klama," not wanting to get into SE and FA > yet. But, lover of attitudinals that I am, I mention that you show your > feelings with a word that you can put anywhere in the sentence. For > instance, "I go :-)" is "mi klama .ui" He asks how to make commands. I tell > him you use a different form of the word for 'you'. He asks how to ask > yes/no questions. I say you stick 'xu' anywhere in the sentence. > So Jimbob goes off and reads the Codex Woldemar. He then asks why I didn't > tell him that the emotions and questions were the same. I explain to him > that in English, we say 'ick' to express displeasure, and we rephrase the > sentence to ask a question. "In Lojban," I say, "the two can occupy the same > grammatical space. But 'How do I ask a question' and 'how do I express > displeasure' are still very different questions, linguistically. It doesn't > matter that the answer is the same, because it doesn't have to be. That in > Lojban it is, makes no difference as to what the questions ask." And then, > Jimbob achieves enlightenment. I agree completely. In English, questions and emotions are expressed using entirely different grammar; in Lojban, they are expressed with the same grammar, and this is wonderfully illustrated by the fact that 'ui' and 'xu', concepts which we would not think of relating in English, share the same selma'o. Was this supposed to somehow help you argue against selma'o? It's a very good argument for them. -- la rab.spir noi sarji zo gumri