[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: TECH: more about *mo'u



Colin Fine writes that in the construction {mi bebau la lojban casnu}
it is inconceivable to interpret "bebau la lojban" simultaneously
as specifying the language of discussion, and as being an integral
part of the syntactically determined sumti {mi bebau la lojban}.  It
has to be attached to one phrase or the other, not both at once.
If the sumti means anything, it means that "I" am somehow "in" the
Lojban language.

He and Mark Shoulson say that termsets are the right way to go, and
I agree.  For example:

        nu'i mi bau la lojban nu'u .e do bau la gliban (nu'u) cu sanga
        [    I  (in Lojban)    ] and [ you (in English) ]        sing

Someone (Mark I think) put out the hardest challenge: to use casnu as the
selbri, since it demands a plural set for its x1, the members of which
discuss something among themselves, like this:

        mi ce      do  casnu               (bau la lojban)
        I and(set) you discuss (something) (in Lojban language)

The following is tempting:

        nu'i mi bau la lojban nu'u ce do bau la gliban (nu'u) cu casnu
             I in Lojban      and(set) you in English            discuss

What might it expand into?

        mi casnu bau la lojban .icebo do casnu bau la gliban
        I discuss in Lojban and (set) you discuss in English

So we have a set composed of discourse level assertions of events of
discussion among single persons.  This isn't very useful.  Unless
someone can come up with a more creative use of grammar, I have to
conclude that you cannot express the required meaning unambiguously in
Lojban, that I and you discuss (something) AND that my part of the
discussion was in Lojban while yours was in English.

I don't shed any tears.  English speakers sling sumti around and expect
their listeners to get them organized right, even inferring unspoken
default selbri.  A logical language ought to have definite rules by
which the spoken words and phrases are organized and interpreted.  In
consequence, complicated combined meanings which can be elided in
English will have to be written out prolixly in full if the rules are
to be followed.  So if you want to be illogical, speak English.

                -- jimc