[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Jorge Llamb�as, On 28/08/2012 03:43:
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 10:02 AM, And Rosta<and.rosta@hidden.email> wrote:As for anaphors, I'd use a pair of predicates meaning "co'e", one with and one without a description argument as a syntactic complement. E.g. "xx-" is "co'e", "is it", and "Xz" has the extra complement, "xza qa grka" (or indifferently, "xza qo grko", "is the dog", where "q" is the ce'u quantifier and "qa grka" means "the property of being canine". maybe you wouldn't consider these anaphors, in which case I'm saying I don't see the need for anaphors.
On further reflection, you could do without the q and have "la xza gerka vska'aka" "I saw the dog"
Are you proposing to change the syntax of predicates from: predicate := CCC* V(�V)* (( k | f | b ) V(�V)*)* to: predicate := CCC* V(�V)* (( k | f | b ) V(�V)*)* (q V(�V)*)* formula)? ?
No, I'm proposing a new type of predicate, possibly comprising only xz, that takes a "sentence" as its dependent, where the dependent sentence provides the (voi-type) description.
There's also the possibility of using stems like qam- (= 'am-), where qa- introduces vowelless name stems, and the name is taken to refer to something already referred to with a predicate starting with m- (ignoring any name-introducing prefix), like Lojban my.In general you can refer to things with formulas, which may consist of more than just one predicate, so the bit about the initial needs some more clarification (as does in Lojban). But I'm not sure I follow the proposed syntax of qam- anyway.
qam is an onomastic predicate (qa- indicating that it's onomastic, and -m- being the distinctive part), which by convention could be used for on-the-fly naming. --And