BPFK Section: Causation sumtcita
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 05:31:09PM +0200, Arnt Richard Johansen
wrote:
> 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:
Indeed.
Once again, I say that the whole marking gismu places as being only
abstractions or only objects is A Mistake, and this is yet another
symptom of that underlying problem. To put it another way, I think
that the metaphysics of whether (WRT the x1 of bapli) an object can
force something to happen, or only a property, is entirely outside
the scope of the BPFK and the language design. That's up to the
speakers.
I was attempting to work within this mistake, however, because
no-one seems to agree with me.
I no longer have a solution to the "bai" problem at hand, within the
scope of enforced place structures, except to say that most usage of
"bai" (and probably of "bapli") thus far is wrong.
I would very much like someone to summarize this discussion (Broca,
if you wouldn't mind?) and stick it in the gismu issues section
(which should be unlocked).
-Robin