[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
xorxes:
> la and cusku di'e
>
> > > i mi nitcu lo'e tanxe "I need a box."
> > > i ma skari ty "Of what colour?"
> > > i makau skari "Of any colour." "(Of whatever colour.)"
> > >
> > > And had some valid objections to this, but I can't remember
> > > them now
> >
> >I can't remember either. But how about "She knows he needs a box
> >of any colour"?
>
> Yes, that was the objection!
>
> {ko'a djuno le du'u ko'e nitcu lo'e tanxe poi makau skari ke'a}
> could end up being ambiguous between
>
> (1) She knows he needs a box of any colour
>
> and
>
> (2) She knows what colour of box he needs
>
> I think it means (2), so how do we say (1)?
>
> We can paraphrase (2) as: "Whatever colour the box he needs is,
> she knows that he needs a box of that colour." That suggests that
> the "whatever" reading might be correct when makau is an argument
> of the main bridi.
My sense is that were {du'u makau} not so entrenched, the
natural way to do it would be:
(1) ko'a djuno lV? du'u ko'e nitcu lo'e tanxe poi makau skari ke'a
(2) makau goi ko'o zo'u ko'a djuno lV? du'u ko'e nitcu lo'e tanxe
poi ko'o skari ke'a
> That might be attributed to {ma}, which we know
> always has sentence scope.
Is there a difference between A and B?
A. X knows that whatever colour of box Z needs, Y knows that
Z needs a box of that colour.
B. Whatever colour of box Z needs, X knows that Y knows that
Z needs a box of that colour.
If there is, which does C mean?
C. X knows that Y knows what colour of box Z needs.
I'm not thinking clearly, but I'm wondering whether it is
really always the case that a makau will be paraphrasable by
a main clause wh-ever.
> Then to restrict the scope to the
> subordinate bridi we might use {da}:
>
> ko'a djuno le du'u ko'e nitcu lo'e tanxe poi dakau skari ke'a
> She knows that he needs a box of any colour
>
> Notice that then we have a difference between:
>
> (3) ko'e nitcu lo tanxe poi dakau skari ke'a
> He needs a box of any colour
Is the lo here deliberate, or should it be lo'e?
> and:
>
> (4) ko'e nitcu lo tanxe poi makau skari ke'a
> He needs a box of whatever colour
>
> In (4) there is some colour such that he needs a box of that
> colour, but I'm not saying which colour it is because it may
> not be relevant (I may not know which colour it is, either)
I don't apprehend the difference in meaning between 3 and 4.
I'm still not convinced about main clause makau, though I am
conscious of the XIAR law.
ko'a ba viska makau poi vi klama
"She'll see whoever comes"
Normally a statement ought to be embeddable within {mi xusra lo'e
du'u}. But
mi xusra loi du'u ko'a ba viska makau poi vi klama
means something like "I say who it is that comes and she will see",
whereas you want it to mean "Whoever comes, I say that she will see
them".
mi xusra loi jetnu je du'au ko'a ba viska ce'u poi vi klam
means "I assert each true completion of [she will invite __ that comes]".
Which is not very informative at all.
Basically I am pretty confused.
--And.
--And.