WikiDiscuss

WikiDiscuss


Robin's gadri Proposal

posts: 2388

Pragmatics again (or still). {zo'e} presupposes {su'o da}; to remove that presupposition we (usually) have to explicitly reject it-- with {noda} in this case. But other things can als work to do this occasionally (though I don't find the given examples completely convincing). The {noda} case doesn't change the selbri; it just says the relation does not hold and implicates that the problem lies in the {noda}d place.
xod <xod@thestonecutters.net> wrote:Jorge LlambĂ­as wrote:


When I say "klama", doesn't that mean "zo'e klama zo'e zo'e zo'e zo'e"?
Then, klama noda is not covered by the meaning of klama, making it a
different selbri.

Now what if we discover a piece of text where the value noda is
understood as obvious for a certain place, and is being elided in that
context? Would it prove my argument, or would you reject it as incorrect
Lojban? Suppose we were discussing wandering aimlessly. Then would
"ba'anai mi .e le mi gerku puzuze'u klama fo la .brodueis." confuse a
reasonable reader as being unrelated to the discussion, since I 'said'
that we had a destination?

In a sense you are claiming that noda is never an obvious term and never
an irrelevant possibility. Isn't that bold?

>Quantified terms are not argument values, they only
>say how many values will satisfy the relationship.
>
>{zo'e} stands for an implicit (obvious or irrelevant) value, not
>for a term.
>
>

But the number of terms should obey the same properties as obviousness
and irrelevance. It should be free to be zero as easily as three.



>If any bridi had any number of implicit arguments, then {zi'o}
>would be pointless. {broda zi'o} would be equivalent to
>{broda zi'o fi'o se broda zo'e}, which means that the argument
>place we remove with {zi'o} is still always there through
>{fi'o se broda}.
>
>

Do you mean to say that zo'e = su'oda, but zi'o = ny. da where n = any
real number?

Whatever the case, I should think that zi'o would prevent the ghost zo'e
from re-appearing in that place.

In your scheme, there is no point ever in BAU zi'o.