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

Re: TECH: And's question re anaphora

To: Erik Rauch <erikr@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
Subject: Re: TECH: And's question re anaphora
From: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1993 10:15:42 -0500
In-Reply-To: <9303191633.AA11255@relay2.UU.NET> from "C.J.Fine@bradford.ac.uk" at Mar 19, 93 03:58:12 pm
Reply-To: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>

la kolin. cusku di'e

> One of the most common uses [of "go'i"] is
> le go'i = 'the x1 of the previous bridi' which in my opinion only works
> because of the subjectivity of 'le'.

Why so?  Since "go'i", as you rightly state, carries the entire previous
bridi with it, including its sumti, then "lo go'i" would be veridically
"something-which-is-in-the-x1-place-of [insert previous bridi here]".

--
John Cowan      cowan@snark.thyrsus.com         ...!uunet!lock60!snark!cowan
                        e'osai ko sarji la lojban.

Prev by Date: RE: TECH.REV: Semantic Analyser Proposal
Next by Date: Re: TECH: And's question re anaphora
Prev by thread: TECH: And's question re anaphora
Next by thread: Re: TECH: And's question re anaphora
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread