[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, John Cowan wrote: > Robert LeChevalier scripsit: > > > I disagree. zi'o applies when there is no value that fills in the place, > > not merely when it is undesirable to fill in the place, but a correct value > > does exist. The latter is clearly part of zo'e and therefore not zi'o > > (because they are mutually exclusive by the discussion of CLL). > > Not so. With zo'e, a definite value exists in the speaker's mind but is > not being expressed, and "FA ma" (for some value of FA) is a reasonable > question. With zi'o, a definite value may or may not exist. > I declare this to be true by founder intent (maybe there should be an > evidential for this). ca'e? So your difference between zo'e and zi'o is "in mind", with zi'o as a superset of zo'e. Whereas I consider zi'o to mean that the place doesn't belong in the relationship that's being expressed. The speaker goes out of their way to delete the place, rather than simply indicating that there's a possibility that the speaker in fact has no value in mind. -- // if (!terrorist) // ignore (); // else collect_data ();