From lojbab@lojban.org Wed May 03 15:28:10 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1424 invoked from network); 3 May 2000 22:27:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m3.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 May 2000 22:27:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO qg.egroups.com) (10.1.2.27) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 May 2000 22:27:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 11370 invoked from network); 3 May 2000 22:27:42 -0000 Received: from stmpy.cais.net (205.252.14.63) by qg.egroups.com with SMTP; 3 May 2000 22:27:42 -0000 Received: from bob (dynamic119.cl7.cais.net [205.177.20.119]) by stmpy.cais.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA21739 for ; Wed, 3 May 2000 18:26:11 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000503181736.00b42950@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: vir1036/pop.cais.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 18:30:19 -0400 To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Well, at least it won't get in my crotch In-Reply-To: <20000503153152.54774.qmail@hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" At 08:31 AM 05/03/2000 -0700, Jorge Llambias wrote: >la pycyn cusku di'e > > >I tend to take the whole exchange as an argument for not dropping x1-- in > >these kinds of exchanges anyhow,where there are often several applicable > >anaphora (not that 'a recent remark' or the like helps much). > >It may well be that in this case there wasn't enough context. >But I don't think that not dropping x1 is practical in general. >As you say, 'a recent remark' is not that much more helpful. >In English you don't really have the choice of not using 'it', >and it is short enough that it doesn't get in the way anyway. >But in Lojban, when the choice is between {la'e di'u} and >nothing, I often go for nothing. Not always, but often. I'm missing the context perhaps, but it seems that knowing that "it" is a "remark" of some kind is usually more helpful than knowing that "it" is merely some possible concrete or abstract sumti of arbitrary complexity. Only if the predicate pretty much unambiguously requires a remark in the elliptical x1 is it not helpful to say "la'edi'u". > >What gets modified in grammatical modification? Is "modified" a legitimate word for what is done, or is it mere (malglico) English metaphor? Specifying a tense in Lojban, where tense (including perfectives) is completely optional is not "modifying" at all; the meaning is unchanged but merely more specific. So the proper English verb for the Lojban process is "specified" or "restricted" for what in English is "tense modification". > In the clearest cases, > >tanru, it is the referent of the modified to the referent of the complex > >and I guess that can be generalized for subject predicate modification Making a tanru is best described as "tanru-ification", and there should be a Lojban word for that act/process that may not have a better English translation. You can use se tanru and te tanru to talk about what in English is "modifier" and "modified", and should not be using "galfi". >I don't think it is the referent, but I'm sure this can be >approached from many angles. This is how I'm thinking of it. >Suppose we're seeing a black cat. I say: {ta mlatu}. Then you >say {ta xekri mlatu}. The referent (the cat we see) has not >changed, it has not been modified. It is the reference that has >been modified, it has been made more precise in this case. i.e. it has been "tanru-ically specified" or "tanru-ically restricted" > >(from the > >referent of the subject to a truth value or event involving that referent) > >and > >so on. But I think there must be a more natural word that {galfi} to deal > >with these relations in Lojban in Lojban. > >I haven't found anything better. {galfi} has already been used >this way in previous discussions in Lojban. It wouldn't be >surprising that this has been it's main use so far, given the >topics of Lojban discussions. But it is certainly worthwhile >questioning it and looking for something better. I agree. lojbab ---- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org (newly updated!)