search

Ntsekees / ilmentufa

Syntactical and semantical parser of Lojban text
Other
12 stars 12 forks source link

JA/JOI should be = TAGbo #14

Open lagleki opened 10 years ago

lagleki commented 10 years ago

{.iJA} and {.iTAGbo} are already gendra. However, {.iJAbo} is gendra but {.TAGbo bo} is not. The latter would be useful sometimes. Ofc. it's evil that {bo} has two functions here so we might want to use a replacement for {bo} in {TAGbo}.

Also {JA/JOI/TAGbo} merge will allow both {broda TAGbo cu brode} and {ko'a TAGbo ko'e}.

Ntsekees commented 10 years ago

Hmm I'm not sure that allowing {mi joi ja do} is a good idea. {.i TAG bo bo} can be allowed separately. However I've forgotten what's the difference between {.i JA} and {.i JA bo}. :)

I'd like to have the TAGbo role assumed by another cmavo, say {bo'oi}, which would be used this way: {.i cabna bo'oi} = {.i ca bo}. It could allow making nonce sentence conjunctions, thus adding expressivity.

lagleki commented 10 years ago

Where can {JA TAGbo} be used? Or why do we use {broda gi'e cabo brode}? Why not just {boda vau ca bo brode}?

Not sure I fully understand all features of your bo'oi but ofc. {i broda bo'oi} is a nice shortcut for {.ifi'o broda fe'u bo}

Ntsekees commented 10 years ago

TAG+bo can be used after all the afterthought connectives: A, GIhA, JA, IJA. With forethought connectives (GA), you need to use {tag gi ... gi} instead. As for allowing {tag+bo} as a shorthand for {and-connective+tag+bo}, this is possible I think.

With regard to selbri+bo'oi, it would behave the same way as TAG+bo.

lagleki commented 10 years ago

brode .i je ki'u bo brodo -----> brode .i je brodo .i lonu go'i cu krinu lonu go'e So the tag+bo creates a third bridi, which states a relation between the two gi'e-created bridi

Well, yes, that's okay but then:

mi .e do'e bo do broda = broda fa mi gi'e do'e bo broda fa do = mi broda .i do'e bo do broda = co'e fa lo su'u da'inai mi broda kei lo su'u da'inai do broda

Why has logical connective magically disappeared in {mi broda .i do'e bo do broda}? I would repack this sentence back into {*mi do'e bo do broda} without any JA/A/GIhA.

Ntsekees commented 10 years ago

Whoops yes, I forgot the {je}. My mistake .u'u

lagleki commented 10 years ago

So then {je} views a bridi as unpackable into two bridi by semantics of {je} and {kanxe} that underlies it.

But then {faubo} is not possible. Also Cowan said that actually {ijebo} parallels {icabo}, not {icabobo}. Thus {*mi faubo do} would parallel {mi ebo do} (which is gendra now).

Then it means that we lack {.e}/{.ije}/{gi'e} counterpart for tags.