[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 08:48:39PM -0600, Rex May - Baloo wrote: > > It seems you're still thinking of "pi" as an adjective. It's a predicate > > like any other. > touch?! That's exactly what I was doing. > > How's this sound one CV turns nonpred things into preds, another vice-versa. What place structure would a CV+nonpred have? What grammar would a CV+pred have? Sounds to me about like a CV to turn an apple into an orange. Similarities between certain predicates and pinvor should have mnemonic value, but they shouldn't be mandated by the language. And I really don't see why "small" and "short time" should have anything to do with each other. > >>> Lojban ma -> kwa (what object?) > >>> Lojban mo -> kwo (what predicate?) > >>> Lojban xu -> kwe (yes/no question) > >>> Lojban xo -> kwi (how many?) > > Loglan has ie, and it's usage described as: > Ie, the only VV-word in the set, is the identity interrogative. With it one > raises questions about the identity of the persons or things being > designated by one's interlocutor. To use it, the speaker puts it immediately > before the argument about which da wishes to raise this question. For > example, suppose someone mentions la Djan Djonz and obviously assumes that > you the listener know who this gentleman is. But you don't. So you say > > (1) Ie la Djan Djonz Which John Jones? > /IEladjan.DJONZ/ > > or simply > (2) Ie Who? > > So ie may be used alone with the sense of 'Who?' or 'Which?', or even as > 'What?' in the sense of 'What did you say?', as well as to mark a failed > identifier. This sounds like the Lojban "ki'a", one of the UI cmavo. The Loglan usage seems quite inconsistent: if it attaches to what comes _next_, then "Ie" alone would attach to the next sentence! "ki'a", like all UI, attaches to what comes before it. I think both ie and ki'a are overloaded. The gloss of "ki'a" is "textual confusion", implying you don't understand what was said or what a word means, but it's also used for confusion about identity. Loglan defines it as confusion about identity, and goes on to use it for textual confusion. -- Rob Speer