From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Fri Sep 27 08:57:54 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 27 Sep 2002 15:57:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 83513 invoked from network); 27 Sep 2002 15:57:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m12.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 27 Sep 2002 15:57:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailbox-14.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.114) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 27 Sep 2002 15:57:54 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (unknown [213.121.71.237]) by mailbox-14.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D1E64A02B for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2002 17:57:49 +0200 (DST) To: Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: paroi ro mentu Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 16:59:25 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <29.2dcaefbc.2ac50f28@aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin pc: > jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: > << [...] > It is still very tempting to just say {paroi ro mentu} > though. Could we say that the tagged sumti's quantifier has > scope over the tag's quantifier? > >> > Not too easily, without mucking with the left to right scope marking. > Is it the case that the tense attached to a selbri is, like {na} to > be taken as at the far left of the prefix. Obviously yes, as it > should be. So, how do we override that? Explicitly seems the only > answer: {ze'a ro mentu paroiku zo'u ...} But how to do it on the > fly? I remember asking to build in context leapers a long time > agoand having that idea rejecteed out of hand. Maybe it is time to > make the suggestion again -- on loCCan, fo course. As I recall, the scope leaping idea wasn't rejected out of hand; it just died because nobody succeeded in proposing a workable solution. The problem with indicating scope by afterthought means is that it is extremely hard to show where something has to leap to. IMO, the grammatical and mental complexity of a functional system of afterthought scope marking would outweigh its benefits. --And.