Subject: Re: [lojban] ce'u once again

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 15:18:01 EDT

In a message dated 4/10/2002 1:46:41 PM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> I agree that logically the two constructions are identical, but this
> is a grammatical rule dictated by the grammatical structure, and not a
> logical rule
But of course one expects that the grammatical structure of a Logical 
Language is dictated by the logic, not by whatever it is that leads to these 
anomalies. It is to be expected that, for example, nominal bridis have (I 
would say "retain") some marks that sentential and predicate bridis have lost 
(or conversely, of course), but beyond that, it is hard to see the point of 
the distinctions and for the different restrictions applied.

<. In particular, since you can say 'ko'a poi broda gi'e
brode' but not 'le broda gi'e brode', I think that the two structures
are significantly different.>

Why, so it does work out! They are certainly different (we have two cases so 
far today) but what is the significance of the difference? That is -- 
minimally -- what forces these differences to be a part of the grammar rather 
than allowing the apparently simpler direct rule (I have been asking this 
question in one form or another for 26 years now, without ever getting a 
reasonable answer, so don't worry if you can't think of one)?

<If we were designing Lojban from scratch,
I would support putting an entire bridi after 'le', but we're not and
that can't be changed now.>

Well, we would leave off (or replace with LE) the first term (or a selected 
term,, using {ke'a} or the like). I know it can't be changed (it is perhaps 
the deepest point in Lojban) and don't really want it changed. I just want 
it explained.