[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Mon, 16 Dec 2002, Nick Nicholas wrote:
> So it now looks to me that, if we resolved "I'm looking for a doctor"
> in Lojban as {mi sisku leka ce'u mikce}, then we should resolve this
> intensional article with {ka}, as something like {le jai ka ce'u
> mikce} (or {se ka}, or whatever.) And if this discussion were not so
> utterly free form, I'd be able to find where someone had an objection
> to that.
No objection here. We seem to be investigating a new level of rigor which,
for once, I appreciate. "I like chocolate" is, at least, mi nelci lo jai
ka cakla, whether or not this is aliased to this evening's interpretation
of lo'e/le'e.
> Am working through Carlson's paper on the Bare English Plural. He
> sidesteps the generic/individual distinction by making it contingent
> on the tense, and has a theory of different selves to cope with
> {ta'e}. I don't know if I like it, but it is helping me to see where
> people are coming from with their arguments...
Thank you for reading papers, and bringing us insights from the naljbo
world.
--
jipno se kerlo
re mei re mei degji kakne