goi - response to jimc

[lojbab (Bob LeChevalier)]

jimc writes:
>I see here "le nanla goi ko'a" where the main phrase is the antecedent of
>the anaphor, and also "ko'e goi lo velcnemu..." where the anaphor is
>the main phrase.  Is this really allowed?  For humans speaking normally
>it is fairly easy to distinguish the anaphor from its newly assigned
>antecedent, but to nail down the difference in all possible circumstances
>may be more difficult.  I would recommend that "se" (explicit conversion)
>be required on one ordering or the other.

>If "goi" may be used to "also-known-as" a pair of non-anaphor sumti,
>you have two interpretations of "A goi B": one analogous to the anaphor
>case in which one sumti is primary and the other is a symbol or
>abbreviation for it, and another where A and B are alternative
>specifications of the same referent set each of which can stand on its
>own.  That's commutative whereas the first interpretation is not.

Historical note: jimc's writings on Loglan were the source of "goi", the
cmavo for relative-phrase anaphora definition.

Yes, both  "referent-sumti goi anaphora", and "anaphora goi referent-sumti"
are both allowed.  I guess theoretically you could have anaphora on both
sides, but this would occur only in the pragmatically useless
"referent-sumti goi <anaphora1 goi anaphora2>" and its mirror image.

To equate alternate specifications for the same referent set, where anaphoric
assignment is not being performed, you would use the restrictive appositive
"po'u" or the non-restrictive appositive "no'u".

An anaphora resolver would not have to be too smart, given the
assumption that one of the set of 'equated' sumti is a referent-sumti, and
the other(s) are assignable anaphora.

First let's list the types of sumti, emphasizing the anaphora:

 assignable variables in ko'a/fo'a
 lerfu
 'new' le descriptions that have not been previously assigned through usage
       or speaker/listener familarity with the context
 semi-assignable mi/do  (usually assigned using vocatives)
 (rarely) la names that have not been previously assigned
 _______________
 non-assignable da-series, elliptical anaphora, ri-series back-counting
    anaphora, demonstratives, metalinguistic sentence anaphora, etc. in KOhA
 all other sumti

Assuming that one sumti must be the referent, that sumti is the lowest
on this hierarchical list:  "ko'a goi le sumti" assigns "ko'a", etc.

The only tricky thing for a computer will be contextual "le"
assignments, and these are risky and liable for confusion if unmarked
anyway ("ca'e" - lexeme UI - could perhaps be used to resolve an
ambiguous assignment situation).  An example of such a case might be
"lemi bersa goi le nanla" = "My son, hereinafter 'the boy'".  Of course
the ultimate resolution in such ambiguous situations is to see which
of the two IS used later as an anaphora - they should not both be used,
since this would violate the semantic sense of anaphora assignment.
In any case, we're pushing what will plausibly be done with goi anyway -
I've never used it except to assign ko'a/fo'a.

Anaphora may be reassigned of course, and things could get trickier, but
I think the above hierarchy indicates when this is easily possible.
There is a member of lexeme UI that resets all assigned anaphora to
'undefined'.  "ni'o" releases all assignments; however, a footnote - If
you started the text with a longer-than-one string of "ni'o"s, anaphora
assigned at that hierarchical scope are not freed by a shorter string of
"ni'o"s.  This allows long texts to be broken up into an outline.
However, I suspect under pragmatic usage, each chapter would reset all
anaphora and then immediately repeat/summarize a list of 'continuing
anaphora' and their assignments.  This is only fair to the reader - even
in English prose where 'he' can only refer to 'Bob', the name is
occasionally repeated to remind the listener who 'he' is.  These summarized
anaphora reassignments will perhaps be a challenge to a computer because
they will no doubt occasionally use elliptical references to the context
that require real-world knowledge.  e.g.  john is the father of sam. ko'a
goi le bersa ... (x1 - the son ...) requires that le bersa be interpreted
even though never 'defined' as an anaphora for 'sam'/'le se patfu'.

(There are also bridi anaphora - lexeme BUhA, corresponding to the
existential da-series, pseudo-lexeme BRODA in the gismu space,
corresponding to the assignable free-variable ko'a-series, and GOhI,
which has a variety of others.  "cei"/Lexeme CEI is the equivalent of
"goi" for assigning bridi anaphora.  The only defined usage would have a
BRODA member on one side, although there have been some discussions of
using CEI in prenex restrictions of BUhA.)

lojbab