TECH: Minor Semantic Change ABSTRACTION #1

After receiving some scattered lobbying, and during a reconsideration of
my reference-grammar papers brought on by Jorge's excellent review of them,
I have decided that it makes sense to change the method of expressing
property abstractions which I specified earlier.  The latest versions of 
my paper on abstraction reflects this change.

ABSTRACTION #1

BACKGROUND:

The statement:

1)	mi nelci le ka dunda
	I like the property-of giving

is semantically vague.  It can mean  "I like giving", "I like receiving", or
even "I like being a gift", depending on whether the property is closing over
the x1, x3, or x2 places of "dunda" respectively.  Note that Example 1 is
distinct from:

2)	mi nelci le nu dunda
	I like the event-of giving

which means that I enjoyed some particular event when someone gave something to
someone.

CURRENT LANGUAGE:

The current (and relatively recent) proposal for disambiguating is to insert
a member of the da-series of pro-sumti into the place which is relevant to
the abstraction:

3)	mi nelci le ka da dunda
	I like the property-of (X being-a-giver)

4)	mi nelci le ka dunda da
	I like the property-of (giving-the-gift X)

5)	mi nelci le ka dunda fi da
	I like the property of (giving to X)

If "da" is already in use, "de" or "di" or some subscripted form can be
replaced.

PROPOSED CHANGE:

Instead of requiring a new, unique member of the da-series, use the special
cmavo "kau" instead, which will in effect create a unique member.

6)	mi nelci le ka dakau dunda
	I like the property of (X [newly created] being-a-giver).

etc.

This mechanism relieves the speaker from any burden of remembering which
da-series cmavo are in use, effectively creating a new one on the fly.
The only current use of "kau" is within "du'u" abstractions to specify
a similar flagging of a sumti or other question-able object within an
indirect question:

7)	mi djuno fi le du'u dakau dunda
	I know about the-identity-of-X (X [new] is-a-giver).

Example 7, like Example 6, uses "dakau" as a newly created temporary variable,
used only within the abstraction clause, and exporting information to the
surrounding context.  The two uses of "kau" should not conflict, unless in
nested abstractions, where the possibility of conflict already exists anyway.

COMMENTS SOLICITED!

-- 
John Cowan		sharing account <lojbab@access.digex.net> for now
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.