[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


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

Re: Connectives



--- In ceqli@yahoogroups.com, "Rex May" <rmay@m...> wrote:
> --- In ceqli@yahoogroups.com, "HandyDad" <lsulky@r...> wrote:
> > --- In ceqli@yahoogroups.com, Rex May - Baloo <rmay@m...> 
> 

--SNIP--
> 
> Very glad to hear it!  Now, the only remaining question about 
> connectives is, do we like the "xe" bound particle, or can we just 
go 
> ahead with "bu" compounds?
> 
> noa xeva > buva
> anoi vaxe > vabu
> onoi fixe > fibu
> 
> Since we've made these nice and terse, somehow the "bu" form seems 
> more okay.  Somehow.

Agree.
> 
> BTW, I just found a nice website that can help us out here:
> http://www.loglan.org/Sanpa/crib-notes.html
> 
> I'm not going to copy it here, but we can look at it and prepare 
our 
> own truth table.
> 
> And, we need a version of ce, ca, co, cu noca, for connecting 
> _within_ predicates, as the Loglanists put it.

> Since it's a small-
> scope connective, so to speak, it can take the forms:
> pikay, piva, pifi, piseya, bupiva, pivabu, pifibu.  
> Rare usages, I expect, except for pikay.

If we follow the Loglan model of each predicate modifying the next, 
then we do need something like this, and the "pi-" series is a nice 
way to do it. However, in my experience, multiple adjectives in 
natural languages usually apply individually to the noun: 'wild green 
cockatoo' means a cockatoo that is wild and green, not wildly green.

This suggests that if we follow the Loglan model, then the intra-
predicate connector will be present more often than not, so it should 
be very short. If we follow the English-language approach, then we 
need a mechanism for _joining_ the modifiers that otherwise would 
each individually modify the noun.

Following the Loglan model has one big advantage: it's been pretty 
thoroughly thought out. So I suggest that the "pi-" series stand, but 
that we have a much shorter synonym for "pikay", which, as you note, 
is likely to be frequent used.

> 
> Intersentence connectives will of course be:
> 
> hakay hava hafi haseya
> 

Again, "hakay" will potentially be frequently used. How about a short 
synonym for it as well?

> And I think we want to encourage the use of "ha" while not 
requiring 
> it.  Now, can we say that compounds of "ha" with morphemes other 
than 
> connectives can express things like 'then' ("hafu"?)