[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
This is an attempt to analyse my use of the Lojban gadri.
I am not suggesting that this is how they should be used,
I'm just trying to figure out how I do use them.
First, let's consider in-mind sets. In the majority
of cases, in-mind sets are singleton sets.
In the case of singleton sets, le=lei=le'e. Referring
to the members of the in-mind set one by one, or to all
of them together, or to myopically singularize them makes
no difference, it is always just the one member.
In the case of singleton in-mind sets I always use {le}.
The reason for the choice, which in principle is completely
arbitrary between le/lei/le'e, is that {le} is the least
marked morphologically. If I had a choice, I would make
{le'e} the least marked and consequently use it for
in-mind singletons, but as things stand, I prefer {le}.
That choice of always using {le} for singleton in-mind
categories has consequences. The first consequence is
that when using {lei} (or {le'e}, which I hardly ever
use) this signals a plural in-mind set. If it was a
singleton set, I would use {le}, so when I use {lei},
even though in theory it need not be a plural set, in
practice it always is.
The second consequence is that because singleton in-mind
sets are so frequent, when there is an occasion to use
a non-singleton in mind set distributively, {le} tends to
feel inadequate. How do I make sure it is not taken as a
singleton in this particular occasion? One possibility
would be to use {le su'o re}, but I never do that. In most
such cases I use {ro le}. In theory {le} = {ro le}. In
practice I never use {ro le} for {ro le pa}, it would
sound strange, so {ro le} normally implicates {le su'o re}.
Sometimes I do use plain {le} for non-singleton in-mind
sets, but this is rare. I also find it rare in the usage
of others. If {le'e} were my default choice for singletons,
then the use of {le} would automatically signal plural in
the same way that {lei} does.
I'm not sure why I almost never use {le'e}. It may be that
I use {lo'e} sometimes when I should use {le'e}, or that
it is just not a very frequent meaning. I don't know.
Now what about {lo'i} cases? Unlike the cases for le'i, most
lo'i are not singletons. In the exceptional cases when they
are singletons, we have that lo=loi=lo'e(=le=lei=le'e). They
are equal to the {le} cases if we ignore veridicality. There
is no specificity distinction possible when lo'i is a singleton.
So, again, when {lo'i} is a singleton I keep using {le}.
In principle, any of the six articles would serve for
these singleton categories. But, given that singleton
categories are very frequent in in-mind sets and rare in
general sets, it makes sense to choose one of the in-mind
articles for this function and use it throughout, unless
for some reason we want to emphasize that it is intrinsically
a singleton category in which case {lo pa} (or {loi pa}, or
{lo'e pa}, it makes no difference) would be appropriate.
lo/loi/lo'e implicate a non-singleton lo'i in the same
manner that {lei} does, just because I would be using
{le} if lo'i were a singleton. So I never say {lo stedu
be mi} if {lo'i stedu be mi} is a singleton. Even though
in principle I could say it, I always prefer {le stedu
be mi}. The consecuence is that {lo broda} and {loi broda}
always implicate an underlying {lo'i su'o re broda}, and
also {lo'e broda} implicates either {lo'i su'o re broda}
or eventually {lo'i no broda}, if we accept that there are
intensions with no extension.
This also justifies the use of {le du'u}, (at least if
we interpret that {lo'i du'u <bridi>} is always a
singleton).
mu'o mi'e xorxes
_________________________________________________________________
Surf the Web without missing calls!�Get MSN Broadband.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp