WikiDiscuss

On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Robin Lee Powell wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 10:49:26PM -0400, John.Cowan wrote:
>> wikidiscuss@lojban.org Arnt Richard Johansen scripsit:
>>
>>> ... But people have been
>>> used "bai" for all kinds of stuff, including people and objects.
>>> This is also the case for the one example (".i za'a bai lo skami
>>> mi nalviska le se cinri nu casnu").
>>>
>>> So, how do we solve this?
>>>
>>
>> Explicitly allow sumti-raising in BAIs, relative to the source
>> gismu.
>
> How about adding this to the Preface section (and, of course, it
> would need to be stuck in the CLL somewhere; ideas?):
>
> !!! Implicit sumti Raising
>
> If a gismu place specifies that it normally takes an abstraction, or
> a particular type of abstraction (ka, nu, etc), then if a concrete
> object appears in that place, it should be considered to have "tu'a"
> in front of it. This also applies to BAI and SE BAI sumti tcita in
> which the underlying gismu place requires an abstraction.

Thanks for taking the effort to write up this paragraph. I think doing it
this way will solve the problem.

However, I think new problems will appear in its stead. Determining what
is a concrete object and what isn't will prove a major headache. Just
consider these few cases:

• mi broda bai lo na badna

Non-banana object (not raised), or non-banana abstraction (raised)?

• mi broda bai lo se nelci be do

Cf. the definition of {nelci}. Object (not raised) or state (raised)?

• mi broda bai ma

Whatever the answer is will determine whether the asker is using
sumti-raising or not!

--
Arnt Richard Johansen http://arj.nvg.org/
There is a great deal of drinking in Japan, unbridled by licensing
hours. It forms an important part of semi-official end of work or
business negotiations ..., but is also rampant without any such
excuse. — Ballhatchet, Kaiser: Teach Yourself Japanese