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

Re: TECH: se, te, & lujvo



> >(i) seljerna should be stipulated as synonymous with se jerna (unlike
> >lujvo formed from tanru)
>
> >or
>
> >(ii) there ought to be a way of coining a lujvo whose x1 is an idiomatic
> >variant of the x1 of the source gismu (if seljerna has an x1 that is
> >an idiomatic variant of the x2 of the source gismu).
>
> Check me if I'm wrong: this sounds like a revival of the dikyjvo proposal.
> You want a defined way of showing how the lujvo form (selbroda) relates to
> the "tanru" form (se broda).  It's the same ambiguity problem I had a while
> back with {selpinxe}, which was used in the tanru {selpinxe ckafi} to mean
> "beverage coffee", taking {selpinxe} to mean {na'o se pinxe}, while I
> understood it as {caca'a se pinxe}, that is, "drunk coffee".  It's dikyjvo
> all over again; deal with that as you like.

This ambiguity you raise is a nasty one, but I was making a different point.

What I was trying to say was the following:

(i) the meaning of a lujvo is not equivalent to the sum of its parts

(ii) if _selgismu_ is not equivalent to _se gismu_, then there ought to
be a way of getting a lujvo that fills the empty slot in the following
pattern:
           le se gismu         le selgismu
           le gismu            ___________


I am not trying to suggest that the place structure of a lujvo should
be predictable.

----
And.