From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Fri Jul 27 19:15:37 2001
Return-Path: <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 28 Jul 2001 02:15:37 -0000
Received: (qmail 50131 invoked from network); 28 Jul 2001 02:15:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 28 Jul 2001 02:15:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO relay3-gui.server.ntli.net) (194.168.4.200) by mta1 with SMTP; 28 Jul 2001 02:15:36 -0000
Received: from m54-mp1-cvx1b.bir.ntl.com ([62.255.40.54] helo=andrew) by relay3-gui.server.ntli.net with smtp (Exim 3.03 #2) id 15QJOS-0002mY-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sat, 28 Jul 2001 02:59:53 +0100
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] conversion lujvo
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2001 03:14:40 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMIEMCEHAA.a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
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: <114.1f347e3.288a3a7e@aol.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>

steven lytle:
> why are lujvo of converted gismu preferred over the bare converted gismu?
> e.g. why is [selcasnu] used instead of [se casnu] in the nuzban headings? it
> seems to me that [se casnu] should be used, since it's simpler and its
> component words are basic ones.

There are no really good reasons for this, and on the whole it is to be
deprecated, because {selcasnu} would usually be used to mean {se casnu},
yet since {selcasnu} needn't be truthconditionally equivalent to
{se casnu}, the use of {selcasnu} *ought to* (but in actual usage
doesn't) imply that it is not truthconditionally equivalent to
{se casnu}.

I suspect, though, that there is a half-decent semiconscious rationale
for the usage of {selcasnu} to mean {se casnu}. It is a way to try to
avoid the logically improper (i.e. unmotivated) foregrounding of the
x1 place. x1 and non-x1 places are semantically equivalent and
undifferentiated (i.e. there is no semantic import to the property
of being a non-x1 sumti) but certain constructions (e.g. sumti
tail) require extra words (i.e. SE) to be used to 'access' non-x1
places. Using {selcasnu} levels the playing field syntactically,
though not phonologically.

--And.