Re: [lojban-beginners] Lojban gismu semantic roles and valency slots

[Bob LeChevalier <rlechevalier@cox.net>]

On 8/14/2023 11:57 AM, Larry Sulky wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I have a question about semantic roles and where they fit in gismu 
> valence slots; specifically, what are the criteria that determine which 
> semantic roles typically go in which slots? For example:
>
>   * The gismu "xebni" ("hates") has the experiencer in slot 1.
>   * The gismu "rigni" ("disgusts") has the experiencer in slot 2.
>
> Why the difference?
>
> Thank you for any insight you can provide.

The short answer is that when the gismu list was created, we were not 
trying to systematize semantic roles.  Rather, we were building off of 
wordlists used in earlier versions of Loglan, which were in turn based 
on lists of the most frequent concepts found in different languages.

xebni was based on the verb concept "x hates y"
rigni was based on the adjectival concept disgusting/repugnant (x 
disgusts y).

To have them parallel, you would probably want either "y is hateful to 
x" which is se xebni, or in a lujvo selxei which would have the 
experiencer in slot 2 or se rigni, in lujvo form selrigni, which would 
be "x feels disgusted in response to y" with the experiencer in slot 1.

se (or sel- as a prefixing affix) causes the 1st and 2nd slots to be 
reversed, whatever they mean

Because it is so trivially easy to create words that have the semantic 
roles in whichever order you want, we never made an attempt to 
systematize the gismu list.  The assumption was always that the gismu 
list would just be a starting point, and people who would actively use 
the language would acquire a vocabulary that was mostly lujvo (and 
fu'ivla borrowings for technical terms), and these would be haphazard 
and unpredictable in semantic roles because the specific words one would 
coin/memorize would be based on what bridi relationship one was trying 
to communicate, and not on a system of semantics. (we explicitly avoided 
choosing a semantic system or theory as the basis for the language 
because 1) I don't really know enough about semantic theory to do so and 
2) presuming one particular semantic theory to be valid for language use 
would in itself skew the usage experience and probably render the 
language in violation of the design principle of metaphysical parsimony.

lojbab
Bob LeChevalier
(Founder)


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban-beginners/6d213327-b3ff-6a0d-8076-c56ac7c3d879%40cox.net.