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

TECH: SE rafsi omitted in lujvo (was Re: dikyjvo, too, bites the dust)

The Seraphim surely rejoiced when Logical Language Group spoke thus:

#Nick?  What does your understanding of dikyjvo as interpreted in your place
#structure paper say about "le'avla" vs "selyle'avla"?  (If you actually
#addressed this example, my apologies for not having read the papers.)

I have already addressed the issue in the paper, but these discussions, and
my editing of the jvoste I have (77% of 1690 lujvo done, though I've got 600
lujvo to add to it), convince me I should spend more time on it when I revise
it (sometime next week or the week after).

There are two types of lujvo in which the incomplete specification of a
jvopagbu is an issue. The first is exemplified by "le'avla": the seltanru
is incompletely specified, lacking a SE (or NU) rafsi. In my paper, I say
that such forms are tolerable, sometimes quite intuitive, given base tanru
ambiguity and our ease in picking the appropriate interpretation, and too
deeply entrenched to eradicate. But they should be regarded as abbreviations
of the 'fuller' form, and their place structure should be as if the SE/NU
rafsi is there. Thus le'avla must have the same place structure as
selyle'avla, if they are indeed the same word, rather than le'avla meaning
something else, eg. the word you say in order to borrow a cup of sugar.

The second type (and I thank John Cowan for helping me crystallise this in
my mind) has the tertanru, rather than the seltanru, elliptical, and is
exemplified by {manskapi} (properly {xekskapi}) as a translation of dark-
skinned. The concept we wish to define by it is a {se skapi}, a person,
not a skin; thus the word should be {xekselskapi}, and there is little
excuse for it not being so. The reason such faulty coinages occur is
malrarbau slovenliness (and I've been too often guilty of it myself). In
particular, we translate literally compounds in which the second component
is adjectival: dark-skinned, six-sided, third-grade.

But "-skinned" doesn't correspond at all to {skapi}, but to {se skapi};
"-sided" not to {mlana}, but to {se mlana}. Not realising this, and trying to
define lujvo around the wrong tertanru, leads to the embarrassment I described
in the paper, where we wish to eliminate the x1 of the lujvo --- clearly
nonsense.  I've been less indulgent with such lujvo, correcting them in the
list.  Thus "tertiary" has nothing to do with {gradu}, a grade. Something
tertiary is not a grade, but something graded, a {te gradu}, as far as I can
tell from the gi'uste. Thus the translation of the adjective "tertiary" I now
give is not {cibrau}, but {cibyteryrau}, and third cousins are {cibyteryrau
tamne}. (Tanru being what they are, the tanru {cibrau tamne} does make
sense; but it doesn't make sense to paraphrase it as {le tamne cu cibrau},
since a {tamne} is not a {gradu}.)

To talk on one more topic doing the rounds here, I rather like the apostrophe,
and agree with the reasons given for its retention. I think tolerating, if
not officially sanctioning 'h' is a good thing (and there is good reason
why such sanction would be impolitic); to demand the *change* of something
so entrenched on such sketchy grounds, OTOH, seems to me folly.

I must admit I can see no reason why morphology rules should not permit
forms like *{kosyne'otau} or *{kosne'ortau} alongside {kosne'otau}. No ambiguity
results; the plurality of forms is already endemic to Lojban, and since
"tosmabru"-type tests are often hard to perform on the fly, I scarcely think
erring on the side of caution in such coinings should be penalised by well-
formedness rejection. If these encroach into le'avla space, so much the better:
le'avla space should be more distinctive than it currently is (we should
emphasise the su'oci consonant crunch) --- I think it lets in too many words.
Admittedly I don't hold much trust in the idea of level IV le'avla.

I must thank all those contributing to the lujvo proposal thread; your
insights and proposals will prove a sizeable contribution to the jvoste ---
once I get around to augmenting it, of course. :)

 A freshman once observed to me:         Nick Nicholas am I, of Melbourne, Oz.
 On the edge of the Rubicon,             nsn@munagin.ee.mu.oz.au (IRC: nicxjo)
 men don't go fishing.                   CogSci and CompSci & wannabe Linguist.
   - Alice Goodman, _Nixon In China_     Mail me! Mail me! Mail me! Or don't!!