From thinkit8@lycos.com Sun Dec 23 17:30:00 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: thinkit8@lycos.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 24 Dec 2001 01:30:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 18575 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2001 01:30:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m6.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 24 Dec 2001 01:30:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n34.groups.yahoo.com) (216.115.96.84) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2001 01:30:00 -0000 Received: from [216.115.96.124] by n34.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 24 Dec 2001 01:30:00 -0000 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 01:29:55 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Binary Language Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20011223075547.GA4599@twcny.rr.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1879 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "thinkit41" X-Originating-IP: 12.224.27.33 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=71054096 X-Yahoo-Profile: thinkit41 --- In lojban@y..., Rob Speer 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