[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
I just posted this on the Wiki:
tags are the members of selma'o BAI, CAhA, CUhE, KI, ZI, PU, VA, FAhA,
ZEhA, VEhA, VIhA, TAhE and ZAhO, {number ROI} compounds, and certain
combinations of all these, possibly modified by members of selma'o NAhE,
SE, MOhI, FEhE and NAI. See "Internal grammar of tags"
http://www.lojban.org/wiki/index.php/Internal%20grammar%20of%20tags
for details. Additionally, tags can be created from selbri as
{FIhO selbri /FEhU/}.
tags express binary relationships. As sumti tcita, they relate a sumti
to the rest of the relationship of which the tagged sumti is a term, as
selbri tcita they relate a glorked sumti to the rest of the relationship.
They can also be used as connectives, in which case they relate one
connectand to the other.
In principle, every tag should be expressible as fi'o broda for some
suitable broda. The x1 of broda is the first argument of the tag, which
corresponds to the sumti in sumti tcita, and to the glorked sumti in
selbri tcita. For example, the tag {ki'u}, or {fi'o krinu}, tags a sumti
that corresponds to the x1 of krinu. Tha tag {ba}, or {fi'o selbalvi},
tags a sumti that corresponds to the x1 of selbalvi.
ki'ugi broda gi brode
ki'u lo nu broda cu brode
lo nu broda cu krinu lo nu brode
because it brodas, it brodes
bagi broda gi brode
ba lo nu broda cu brode
lo nu broda cu selbalvi lo nu brode
after it brodas, it brodes
ni'agi broda gi brode
ni'a lo nu broda cu brode
lo nu broda cu selni'a lo nu brode
under where it brodas, it brodes
ka'egi broda gi brode
ka'e lo nu broda cu brode
lo nu broda cu selcu'i lo nu brode
if it brodas, it could brode
So far so good. Now what happens if we want to use the tag as an
afterthought connective? Unfortunately, there is no uniform rule:
ki'ugi broda gi brode
brode iki'ubo broda
bagi broda gi brode
broda ibabo brode
With BAIs, the first argument follows the afterthought tag, the second
argument comes first. With PUs, it is the other way around.
It should be noticed that PUs work like the asymmetrical logical connectives:
gu broda gi brode
broda iju brode
However, the more intuitive rule, it seems to me, is the one followed by
BAIs. Indeed, I would prefer {gu broda gi brode} to mean {brode iju broda}.
Nothing is said in CLL (I think) about other tags as afterthought
connectives, but presumably FAhAs at least would behave like PUs:
ni'agi broda gi brode
broda ini'abo brode
under where it brodas, it brodes
Intuitively I would read the second one the other way around.
Comments?
mu'o mi'e xorxes
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com