Subject: Re: Binary Language

From: "thinkit41" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 01:29:55 -0000

--- In lojban@y..., Rob Speer <rob@t...> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2001 at 04:27:52AM -0000, thinkit41 wrote:
> > Give is simple, the subject (arg1) is the giver, and the object 
> > (arg2) is the object given. A sentence tag defines the 
recipient. 
> > Are there any really ternary verbs in English? You only get 
things 
> > like "give me the object" because we are shortening from "give 
the 
> > object to me".
> 
> Many verbs are ternary - ones which have a subject, direct object, 
and
> indirect object. Putting in the optional "to" before "me" doesn't 
make
> it any less the indirect object of "give"; in fact, it makes it 
more
> _explicitly_ the indirect object.
> 
> The recipient is a part of the action of giving; if you give a 
dollar to
> nobody, you are not a giver.

No, it's still a two argument verb--that's why it's called 
transitive. The "to me" can be replaced by "in the cellar". They 
are both prepositional phrases (or modals).

> If you're going to leave necessary places out of your place 
structures,
> why are you even bothering to use place structures in the first 
place?
> If you could get over your fascination with the number 2 you could 
just
> make everything a tag like in Voksigid.

I don't disagree with lojban's choice of up to 5 places. It's very 
useful in a vocalized language where you really want to say things 
quickly. I thought about using one place or no places, both of 
which are possible. But I decided on two.

> Then again, I can't see how tags are implemented at all in your
> language. Or, in fact, get your revised description - is it in a
> different place from the original?

Think modals. That and the operator I took directly from lojban. 
I've made numerous changes and greatly expanded the spec, but I'll 
try to go through it better before I post it again.

> -- 
> la rab.spir
> noi 001110110100110101