[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
At 03:56 AM 1/14/03 +0000, And Rosta wrote:
> No, it wouldn't. I said long ago that the x1s of NUs are +abstract, > and you wanted to know what that meant. This is what I meant: they are > +noematic, as opposed to the x1s of the other predicates in Lojban, > which are (generally speaking) -noematic -- there are exceptions, > as always, like "x1 is noematic". 1/2 :-) If the BF were to find that CLL does not clearly prescribe your views on nu, and consequently calls them into question, would you come up with reasons why it is better that nu is +noematic than -noematic? I'm curious as to whether you do have reasons, though things are so hectic at the moment that actually spelling out those reasons might best be left till a future time (or till never, if the BF never considers the issue).
I have no idea what noematic means, and a dictionary definition gives no clue to me what +/-noematic would mean ...
BUT, there are a few gismu that were privileged in that we allowed them to violate other rules for choosing their gismu place structures, and this may relate to your question.
gasnu and zukte and ckaji and lifri (and djuno but it was given this property for a different reason) all are privileged in allowing one defined place to be a sumti raised from an abstraction in another. We tried at one point to eliminate all sumti-raisings from the place structures, but could not manage it. These raisings were deemed critical to the language. Cowan and pc and Nora and I at various times tried to come up with reasons why certain words qualified and others didn't, and this may be where Cowan got his answer. I looked at patterns, with the result that all of the gismu that correspond to abstractors have that privilege if needed, but fasnu did not need it. But fasnu and xanri then got paired as "special" at another point which involves possible worlds. I don't remember all the reasons and we explicitly did NOT flag them because other than for determining place structures we wanted no categorization of the gismu by "types of predicate". I do know that these tend to be the gismu that all the tough issues come up regarding, so it seems worth noting here, even if the details are too fuzzy (Cowan may remember more, so this may stimulate his memory).
Some of this may be recorded in early Lojban List history, but I think much took place by telephone because pc was not yet on line.
lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@hidden.email Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org