Usage of cleft places and raised sumti

[cbmvax!uunet!math.ucla.edu!jimc]

I got translations of our current model sentences into several languages.
English:

I want to eat an apple.
I want an apple.
I try to open the door.
I try the door.

In Chinese, Hindi and Hebrew, "I try the door" is meaningless; in other
words, this combination is not subject to sumti raising.  However, "I
want an apple" does mean something.  For the versions which in Lojban
are rendered with abstract sumti, 9 of 10 cases (counting English) are
more or less clearly also rendered by explicit abstract sumti, though a
tanru-like combination is also credible for some.  In all of these,
without any question at all in the informants' minds, x1 of the main
predicate was at main level, but was also x1 of the abstraction.  Thus
is justified a rule in which x1 of the abstraction is copied from main
level.  In other words, these sentences are rendered with cleft places,
never uncleft.

Language results:

Latin (1st year student, not very authoritative):

    vello edere    malum
(I) want  (to) eat apple

    tempto aperire   portam
(I) try    (to) open door

Vello and tempto are members of a category of what they call "modal
verbs" which expect an abstract sumti in x2.   If I interpret correctly
the book's explanation, "malum" is inside an explicit abstract sumti;
it is not an argument of vello.  Neither I nor my kid know enough Latin
to tell whether or not "vello malum" or "tempto portam" mean anything.  

Hindi:

me sabe  kana chahadi hum
I  apple eat  want    (verb marker)

muje sabe  chahia
I    apple want

mene darwaza kolne ki     koshesh ki
I    door    open  (glue) try     (glue)

I wonder if this is their style of parallel diklujvo, rather than a
modal verb?  My informant identified "ki" as a glue word.  The
explanation of "me sabe kana chahadi hum" sounded more like a modal
verb.

"I try the door" is incomprehensible in Hindi.

Hebrew:

ani rotze le'exol  tapuax
I   want  to'eat   apple

ani rotze tapuax
I   want  apple

ani nissiti liftoax  et  hadelet 
I   try     to'open  the door

"I try the door" is incomprehensible in Hebrew.

Chinese: Tone symbols: 1 -   2 /   3 |   4 !   1-prime *.  y = both schwa 
and "ue", sorry.

|wo !yao -cr /ping |guo
I   want eat apple fruit

|wo !yao -i  *gy          /ping |guo
I   want one (thing unit) apple fruit

|wo !xe -dze !cy -kai /men
I   try....  go  open door  

"go" is the motion word.  "go open" is a stereotyped parallel compound
that they use in this kind of phrase.  Chinese has lots of these
stereotyped compounds, probably to add redundant information to aid in
resolving the meaning of the individual words.  

|wo !xe -dze -tsy *gy          /men
I   try....  this (thing unit) door

This sentence is syntactically valid but is meaningless in Chinese.

		-- jimc