[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Jordan:
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 07:58:07PM -0000, And Rosta wrote:
> > Jordan:
> > > On Sat, Dec 14, 2002 at 03:41:03PM -0000, And Rosta wrote:
> > > > Jordan:
> > > [...]
> > > > The main attraction of ke'a rather than ce'u is among those given
> > > > on the poi'i wiki page: it allows a simple way to 'reflexives',
> > > > since multiple ke'a corefer while multiple ce'u cannot corefer
> > >
> > > That's what nei is for:
> > > mi ckaji leka ce'u citka le nei
> >
> > But once the two coreferential terms are not in the same bridi,
> > it doesn't work, or at least not without cumbersome subscripting
> > operating according to unofficial and unagreed conventions
> >
> > Also, the meaning of {nei} has not been satisfactorily agreed
> > on yet
>
> Well; there's also the ability to explicitly subscript: ce'u xi pa
> is always the same
>
> If you're worried about length, go propose some da de di equivalents
> for ce'u (cei'a cei'u cei'i?). Personally I don't see a need though:
> 99.9% of the time people use only 1 variable in a ka abstract, so
> if you want a more complicated expression it's ok that you either
> need to use different stuff (nei), or if it's nested by more than
> one (no'a will work for 1) need to use subscripting
The convenience of ke'a is exactly when you want to use one variable
more than once. It saves having to use ce'u subscripting (also an
unofficial convention), or nei/no'a subscripting (also unofficial),
which also won't even work if neither instance of the variable is
an argument of the selbri. The method that definitely will work is
ko'a-assignment with goi, but that is cumbersome. So, ke'a is much
more convenient than the alternatives.
That said, if there are poi/poi'i embedded within poi/poi'i, ko'a
assignment remains necessary, which is what led me to propose a
range of experimentals to abbreviate KOhA-assignment.
--And.