relative Clauses with Cmevla: Difference between revisions

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
 
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:


NIALL (Non Intelligent Acquired Language Learner) is a program availible online (I forget where). It uses Markov chains to simulate learning of language. While it is not always grammatical, and never coherent, I (mi'e. [[jbocre: .kreig.daniyl.|.kreig.daniyl.]]) have been training it with a mix of classic [[jbocre: texts in Lojban|texts in Lojban]], rounds of [[Broken Phone|Broken Phone]] and random conversation. Now that it is 'mature' enough to occasionally generate insights such as ''ro temci lo menli cu nibli'', which is probably the deepest sentiment I have ever seen from a chatterbot that had never gotten such a sentence from a human, I have put it on the couch with ''la .elizas.'', Somebody's (I forget whose) lojbanization of Eliza. Here is an abridged (so you don't get bored) dialogue between NIALL and .elizas. about NIALL's belief that ey is named 'Evil Eye', which came up twice in the much longer unabridged version:
{CODE(wrap="1]][[jbocre: 09:36]] <selckiku> i wish someone would have a name with "noi" or "poi"


E: i coi mi'e elizas i ma nabmi do
[[jbocre: 09:36]] <tomoj> I like more complicated names as well


N: i ko ca'o tavla
[[jbocre: 09:37]] <selckiku> in theory we have that kind of name, but in practice we never have!


E: i xu do se nabmi da pe le menli
[[jbocre: 09:37]] <selckiku> i think a nice name would be "la tirxu poi sipna", Sleeping Tiger


N: mi selcme zo malzgan
[[jbocre: 09:37]] <tomoj> {la nu spoja be bu'u le tsani}


E: i xu do klama ti ki'u le nu do selcme zo malzgan
[[jbocre: 09:37]] <selckiku> maybe i'll name someone in la mafro'i that


N: ni'o le respa jimpe ku mo
[[jbocre: 09:38]] <tomoj> .i la mafro'i cu mo


E: i pe'i mi na jimpe le piromei co se cusku be do
[[jbocre: 09:38]] <vensa> selckiku: in {la tirxu poi sipna}, the "sleeping" isn't a part of the name. is it?


N: mi jimpe doi skami
[[jbocre: 09:38]] <selckiku> vensa, yes, it is


E: i xu loi skami se xanka do
[[jbocre: 09:38]] <vensa> because it's {la}?


N: na terpa
[[jbocre: 09:38]] <selckiku> vensa, in "la tirxu ku poi sipna", the "ku" makes it not part of the name


E: i e'o ko ckize'a lei se pensi be do
[[jbocre: 09:38]] <vensa> wwwwhhat?


N: le xirli'ustizu na plana fa mi i lo gerku cu spita
[[jbocre: 09:38]] <tomoj> which brings up an interesting problem


E: i xu do jinvi le du'u le nu lo gerku cu spita cu fadni
[[jbocre: 09:38]] <vensa> didnt know that


N: co'o
[[jbocre: 09:38]] <tomoj> say we want to translate "Doubting Thomas"


Someday, when my NIALL file gets even more interesting, there is a chance I will put its dictionary online for general enjoyment. - mi'e. [[jbocre: .kreig.daniyl.|.kreig.daniyl.]]
[[jbocre: 09:38]] <vensa> selckiku: citation plz
 
[[jbocre: 09:39]] <tomoj> just like "Sleeping Tiger"
 
[[jbocre: 09:39]] <tomoj> you can't
 
[[jbocre: 09:39]] <lindar> Well, if the grammar didn't (apparently) auto-terminate cmevla, my full name would be {la .lindar. noi banli je blanu blozeile'a ku'o ju'u gai
 
[[jbocre: 09:39]] <tomoj> because a cmevla isn't terminated by {ku
 
[[jbocre: 09:39]] <tomoj> or "Alexander the Great"
 
[[jbocre: 09:39]] <vensa> tomoj: good point
 
[[jbocre: 09:39]] <vensa> I recall seeing some proposed translation of Alexander the Great tho
 
[[jbocre: 09:40]] <ctino> But if the gismu is at the end then you can terminate it with ku, no>?
 
[[jbocre: 09:40]] <tomoj> wonder what it would be
 
[[jbocre: 09:40]] <selckiku> vensa, here u go: it's in CLL somewher
 
[[jbocre: 09:40]] <selckiku> CITATION ACCOMPLISHED
 
[[jbocre: 09:40]] <vensa> ha
 
[[jbocre: 09:40]] <tomoj> .i .u'i
 
[[jbocre: 09:40]] <lindar> People don't study their terminators enough, so they don't know the nifty shit it can do.
 
[[jbocre: 09:40]] <vensa> that seems troubling
 
[[jbocre: 09:41]] <vensa> an "elidable terminator" should change the "Semantics" IMO
 
[[jbocre: 09:41]]  * ctino likes terminators. They're comforting, like hot chocolate
 
[[jbocre: 09:41]] <selckiku> u can put the "poi" inside after the "la", that ought to do it
 
[[jbocre: 09:41]] <selckiku> la poi -doubt- ku'o .tomas.
 
[[jbocre: 09:41]] <vensa> whaaaat
 
[[jbocre: 09:41]] <vensa> senpi BTW
 
[[jbocre: 09:41]] <selckiku> o yeah, zo senpi
 
[[jbocre: 09:41]] <vensa> gerna la poi senpi ku'o tomas
 
[[jbocre: 09:41]] <lindar> Children, pay the fuck attention: {pa lo ci broda noi blanu ku'o ku} means that all three brodas are blue. {pa lo ci broda ku noi blanu ku'o} means that the one broda we're talking about is blue, but doesn't say anything about the other two.
 
[[jbocre: 09:41]] <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {la <poi (1senpi VAU)1 ku'o> tomas} VAU]])0
 
[[jbocre: 09:42]] <vensa> wow!
 
[[jbocre: 09:42]] <tomoj> uhuhh
 
[[jbocre: 09:42]] <tomoj> gerna la poi senpi tomas
 
[[jbocre: 09:42]] <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {la <poi (1senpi VAU)1 KU'O> tomas} VAU]])0
 
[[jbocre: 09:42]] <lindar> Wow, does that actually work?
 
[[jbocre: 09:42]]  * lindar didn't think to do that.
 
[[jbocre: 09:42]] <tomoj> hehe
 
[[jbocre: 09:42]] <tomoj> pay attention child
 
[[jbocre: 09:42]] <vensa> lindar: thanks. I didnt pay attention to the details
 
[[jbocre: 09:42]] <tomoj> we are all children here :)
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <lindar> Bitchin'.
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <vensa> so {noi} can attach either to selbri or sumti?
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <lindar> No.
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <lindar> Pretty sure it can't.
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <lindar> gerna .i ko'a broda noi brode ku'o vau
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <gerna> not grammatical: .i ko'a broda _noi_ ⚠  brode ku'o vau
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <vensa> so whats it doing in ex1
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <vensa> ?
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <lindar> Nope.
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <lindar> It's attaching to the inner quantifier.
 
[[jbocre: 09:43]] <vensa> hmmm
 
[[jbocre: 09:44]] <vensa> oh ok
 
[[jbocre: 09:44]] <lindar> gerna pa lo ci broda noi brode ku'o ku
 
[[jbocre: 09:44]] <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {<pa BOI> <lo (1[jbocre: {ci BOI} broda]] [[jbocre: noi {brode VAU} ku'o]])1 ku>} VAU])0
 
[[jbocre: 09:44]] <lindar> gerna pa lo ci broda ku noi brode ku'o
 
[[jbocre: 09:44]] <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {<(1pa BOI)1 (1lo [jbocre: {ci BOI} broda]] ku)1> <noi (1brode VAU)1 ku'o>} VAU])0
 
[[jbocre: 09:44]] <vensa> lindar: do YOU hvae the link for this?
 
[[jbocre: 09:44]] <lindar> No, I have the fucking grammar bot telling me I'm right.
 
[[jbocre: 09:44]] <lindar> Observe. =D
 
[[jbocre: 09:44]] <vensa> i c
 
[[jbocre: 09:44]] <ctino> la poi banli .aleksandr.
 
[[jbocre: 09:45]] <vensa> I still like to have references :)
 
[[jbocre: 09:45]] <vensa> nm
 
[[jbocre: 09:45]]  * ctino is happy now
 
[[jbocre: 09:45]] <vensa> the {la poi} thing is especially demanding a citation IMO
 
[[jbocre: 09:45]]  * vensa looks
 
[[jbocre: 09:45]] <ctino> Jboski likes it.
 
[[jbocre: 09:46]] <ctino> So it must be okay to do.
 
[[jbocre: 09:46]] == lindar has changed nick to la_poi_banli_je_
 
[[jbocre: 09:46]] <la_poi_banli_je_> Aww! character limit?
 
[[jbocre: 09:46]] <selckiku> jboski has some weird ideas actually
 
[[jbocre: 09:46]] == la_poi_banli_je_ has changed nick to lindar
 
[[jbocre: 09:46]] <vensa> hehe
 
[[jbocre: 09:46]] <selckiku> omg that name just made my whole irc text shift over
 
[[jbocre: 09:46]] <Twey> ‘la banli me la .aleksandr.’ I would say
 
[[jbocre: 09:46]] <lindar> selkik: use a better client =D
 
[[jbocre: 09:46]] <lindar> Like irssi
 
[[jbocre: 09:47]] <ctino> But that's so much longer, Twey D:
 
[[jbocre: 09:47]] <tomoj> http://jbotcan.org/bnf/
 
[[jbocre: 09:47]] <lindar> My client justifies to the left side of the name, not the right.
 
[[jbocre: 09:47]] <Twey> gerna la poi banli aleksandr
 
[[jbocre: 09:47]] <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {la <poi (1banli VAU)1 KU'O> aleksandr} VAU]])0
 
[[jbocre: 09:47]]  * lindar hates clients that do it the other way.
 
[[jbocre: 09:47]] <tomoj> http://jbotcan.org/bnf/#sumti-6
 
[[jbocre: 09:47]] <tomoj> "LA # [[jbocre: relative-clauses|relative-clauses]] CMENE ... #"
 
[[jbocre: 09:48]] <vensa> Twey: y u need {me}?
 
[[jbocre: 09:49]] <ctino> Now the question is: would that be "Alexander the Great", or "The great (in fashion) Alexander" ?
 
[[jbocre: 09:49]] <ctino> I guess it's pretty much the same thing.
 
[[jbocre: 09:49]] <vensa> it is IMO
 
[[jbocre: 09:49]] <lindar> It doesn't say in the names chapter.
 
[[jbocre: 09:50]] <lindar> http://dag.github.com/cll/6/12/
 
[[jbocre: 09:50]] <Ledgebin> je
 
[[jbocre: 09:50]] <Ledgebin> kenra?
 
[[jbocre: 09:50]] <vensa> http://dag.github.com/cll/8/6/
 
[[jbocre: 09:50]] <vensa> on the bottom
 
[[jbocre: 09:50]] <ctino> What's with the freakin' cancer.
 
[[jbocre: 09:50]] <vensa> but I have ye to find {la poi}
 
[[jbocre: 09:52]] <Ledgebin> what does .uinai mean?
 
[[jbocre: 09:52]] <Ledgebin> no?
 
[[jbocre: 09:52]] <ctino> Unhappy.
 
[[jbocre: 09:52]] <Ledgebin> aha ty
 
[[jbocre: 09:52]] <ctino> No problem.
 
[[jbocre: 09:52]] == tajys [[jbocre: [email protected]]] has quit [[jbocre: Quit: Leaving]]
 
[[jbocre: 09:52]] <vensa> selckiku: do you remembet where you read the {la poi} stuff?
 
[[jbocre: 09:53]] <tomoj> it's right there in the bnf
 
[[jbocre: 09:53]] <selckiku> vensa, not really.. a zillion discussions about it i think
 
[[jbocre: 09:53]] <ctino> Haha. I can imagine a little kid who's not getting what they want and screaming "nai nai nai nai NAI!" at the top of their lungs.
 
[[jbocre: 09:53]] <selckiku> we go around in circles on the same tracks, i'm used to every stop
 
[[jbocre: 09:54]] <lindar> Ledgebin: kenra means cancer... you are very strange for saying cancer over and over again.
 
[[jbocre: 09:54]] <vensa> tomoj: the bnf is not self explanatory
 
[[jbocre: 09:54]]  * ctino agrees with lindar
 
[[jbocre: 09:54]] <tomoj> no
 
[[jbocre: 09:54]] <tomoj> it just proves that these sentences are grammatical
 
[[jbocre: 09:54]] <vensa> true
 
[[jbocre: 09:54]] == tajys [[jbocre: ~Tajha@c-68-55-6-56.hsd1.va.comcast.net]] has joined #lojban
 
[[jbocre: 09:54]] <vensa> but it's not CLL :)
 
[[jbocre: 09:54]] <tomoj> I see only one meaningful interpretation though
 
[[jbocre: 09:54]] <vensa> I agree
 
[[jbocre: 09:55]] <vensa> still, it dont hurt to ask
 
[[jbocre: 09:55]] <tomoj> hmm
 
[[jbocre: 09:55]] <tomoj> but can you say "Thomas (who incidentally was doubting), ..."
 
[[jbocre: 09:56]] <tomoj> no {ku}
 
[[jbocre: 09:56]] <Ledgebin> kenra?
 
[[jbocre: 09:56]] <Ledgebin> vensa: hi
 
[[jbocre: 09:56]] <Ledgebin> how do i do this
 
[[jbocre: 09:56]] <Ledgebin> i cant understanding
 
[[jbocre: 09:57]] <vensa> tomoj: isnt that what {la tomas noi senpi} means be default?
 
[[jbocre: 09:57]] <Ledgebin> uhm
 
[[jbocre: 09:57]] <selckiku> do na kakne lo nu do nu jimpe
 
[[jbocre: 09:57]] <tomoj> who knows?
 
[[jbocre: 09:57]] <tomoj> the CLL doesn't specify
 
[[jbocre: 09:57]] <ctino> vensa: that looks correct to me.
 
[[jbocre: 09:57]] <vensa> I thought that's what lindar implied
 
[[jbocre: 09:58]] <Ledgebin> lnder
 
[[jbocre: 09:58]] <tomoj> {la tomas noi senpi} could either be "'Thomas', who incidentally doubts", or "'Thomas who Incidentally Doubts'"
 
[[jbocre: 09:58]] <Ledgebin> timojbo
 
[[jbocre: 09:58]] <vensa> I think it's implied because of auto-cmevla-termination
 
[[jbocre: 09:58]] <ctino> No.
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <vensa> so, the correlation should hold
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <ctino> Because the cmevla terminates...
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <tomoj> right
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <ctino> As vensa says.
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <tomoj> that's a valid interpretation
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <tomoj> but the CLL doesn't say this
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <vensa> {lo broda ku noi brode} ~= {la cmevlas noi brode}
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <tomoj> I think that's good though
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <ctino> But jboski does.
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <vensa> tomoj: another point for the BPFK to discuss
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <tomoj> if you want the relative clause as part of the name, put it before the cmene
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <Ledgebin> i mi na jimpe
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <vensa> I'll put that in my discussion topics as well
 
[[jbocre: 09:59]] <selckiku> theoretically, if the BPFK discussed points
 
[[jbocre: {CODE}{CODE(wrap="1]][jbocre: 18:45]] <vensa> hi, in continuation to an earlier topic today, I think I found another way to "get around" the problem of adding NOI to a cmevla name.
 
[[jbocre: 18:46]] <vensa> {la poi banli ku'o aleksander} was the first approach
 
[[jbocre: 18:46]] <vensa> but you couldnt say the Alexander first
 
[[jbocre: 18:46]] <vensa> but... how about {la me la aleksander noi banli}
 
[[jbocre: 18:47]] <vensa> gerna la me la aleksander noi banli
 
[[jbocre: 18:47]] <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {la <me (1[jbocre: la aleksander|la aleksander]] [[jbocre: noi {banli VAU} KU'O]])1 ME'U> KU} VAU])0
 
[[jbocre: 18:47]] <vensa> seems like the {noi} still attaches INSIDE the {ku}.
 
[[jbocre: 18:47]] <vensa> however, does it carry the same meaning?
 
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
[[jbocre: 18:48]] == Zarutian [[jbocre: ~zarutian@194-144-84-110.du.xdsl.is]] has joined #lojban
 
[[jbocre: 18:48]] == cirzgamanti` [[jbocre: [email protected]]] has quit [[jbocre: Ping timeout: 260 seconds]]
 
[[jbocre: 18:49]] == cirzgamanti` [[jbocre: [email protected]]] has joined #lojban
 
[[jbocre: 18:53]] <@xalbo> Interesting, weird, and complicated. But it looks like it works.
 
[[jbocre: 18:55]] <vensa> yay!
 
[[jbocre: 18:55]] <vensa> I guess Id use it just for styling
 
[[jbocre: 18:55]] <vensa> but ki'e la xalbo{CODE}
 
Note: it is also grammatical to say {la PA la .aleksander. noi banli} as per [http://dag.github.com/cll/6/9/index.html hapter 6 Section 9 whatisarelation], which gives as the name {la .aleksander. noi banli}, not {me la .aleksander. noi banli} (though a reasonable audience would probably ignore the {me} part of the name), and does not imply that there is something called {aleksander} (though, again, a reasonable audience would understand).

Revision as of 17:11, 4 November 2013

{CODE(wrap="1]]jbocre: 09:36 <selckiku> i wish someone would have a name with "noi" or "poi"

jbocre: 09:36 <tomoj> I like more complicated names as well

jbocre: 09:37 <selckiku> in theory we have that kind of name, but in practice we never have!

jbocre: 09:37 <selckiku> i think a nice name would be "la tirxu poi sipna", Sleeping Tiger

jbocre: 09:37 <tomoj> {la nu spoja be bu'u le tsani}

jbocre: 09:37 <selckiku> maybe i'll name someone in la mafro'i that

jbocre: 09:38 <tomoj> .i la mafro'i cu mo

jbocre: 09:38 <vensa> selckiku: in {la tirxu poi sipna}, the "sleeping" isn't a part of the name. is it?

jbocre: 09:38 <selckiku> vensa, yes, it is

jbocre: 09:38 <vensa> because it's {la}?

jbocre: 09:38 <selckiku> vensa, in "la tirxu ku poi sipna", the "ku" makes it not part of the name

jbocre: 09:38 <vensa> wwwwhhat?

jbocre: 09:38 <tomoj> which brings up an interesting problem

jbocre: 09:38 <vensa> didnt know that

jbocre: 09:38 <tomoj> say we want to translate "Doubting Thomas"

jbocre: 09:38 <vensa> selckiku: citation plz

jbocre: 09:39 <tomoj> just like "Sleeping Tiger"

jbocre: 09:39 <tomoj> you can't

jbocre: 09:39 <lindar> Well, if the grammar didn't (apparently) auto-terminate cmevla, my full name would be {la .lindar. noi banli je blanu blozeile'a ku'o ju'u gai

jbocre: 09:39 <tomoj> because a cmevla isn't terminated by {ku

jbocre: 09:39 <tomoj> or "Alexander the Great"

jbocre: 09:39 <vensa> tomoj: good point

jbocre: 09:39 <vensa> I recall seeing some proposed translation of Alexander the Great tho

jbocre: 09:40 <ctino> But if the gismu is at the end then you can terminate it with ku, no>?

jbocre: 09:40 <tomoj> wonder what it would be

jbocre: 09:40 <selckiku> vensa, here u go: it's in CLL somewher

jbocre: 09:40 <selckiku> CITATION ACCOMPLISHED

jbocre: 09:40 <vensa> ha

jbocre: 09:40 <tomoj> .i .u'i

jbocre: 09:40 <lindar> People don't study their terminators enough, so they don't know the nifty shit it can do.

jbocre: 09:40 <vensa> that seems troubling

jbocre: 09:41 <vensa> an "elidable terminator" should change the "Semantics" IMO

jbocre: 09:41 * ctino likes terminators. They're comforting, like hot chocolate

jbocre: 09:41 <selckiku> u can put the "poi" inside after the "la", that ought to do it

jbocre: 09:41 <selckiku> la poi -doubt- ku'o .tomas.

jbocre: 09:41 <vensa> whaaaat

jbocre: 09:41 <vensa> senpi BTW

jbocre: 09:41 <selckiku> o yeah, zo senpi

jbocre: 09:41 <vensa> gerna la poi senpi ku'o tomas

jbocre: 09:41 <lindar> Children, pay the fuck attention: {pa lo ci broda noi blanu ku'o ku} means that all three brodas are blue. {pa lo ci broda ku noi blanu ku'o} means that the one broda we're talking about is blue, but doesn't say anything about the other two.

jbocre: 09:41 <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {la <poi (1senpi VAU)1 ku'o> tomas} VAU]])0

jbocre: 09:42 <vensa> wow!

jbocre: 09:42 <tomoj> uhuhh

jbocre: 09:42 <tomoj> gerna la poi senpi tomas

jbocre: 09:42 <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {la <poi (1senpi VAU)1 KU'O> tomas} VAU]])0

jbocre: 09:42 <lindar> Wow, does that actually work?

jbocre: 09:42 * lindar didn't think to do that.

jbocre: 09:42 <tomoj> hehe

jbocre: 09:42 <tomoj> pay attention child

jbocre: 09:42 <vensa> lindar: thanks. I didnt pay attention to the details

jbocre: 09:42 <tomoj> we are all children here :)

jbocre: 09:43 <lindar> Bitchin'.

jbocre: 09:43 <vensa> so {noi} can attach either to selbri or sumti?

jbocre: 09:43 <lindar> No.

jbocre: 09:43 <lindar> Pretty sure it can't.

jbocre: 09:43 <lindar> gerna .i ko'a broda noi brode ku'o vau

jbocre: 09:43 <gerna> not grammatical: .i ko'a broda _noi_ ⚠ brode ku'o vau

jbocre: 09:43 <vensa> so whats it doing in ex1

jbocre: 09:43 <vensa> ?

jbocre: 09:43 <lindar> Nope.

jbocre: 09:43 <lindar> It's attaching to the inner quantifier.

jbocre: 09:43 <vensa> hmmm

jbocre: 09:44 <vensa> oh ok

jbocre: 09:44 <lindar> gerna pa lo ci broda noi brode ku'o ku

jbocre: 09:44 <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {<pa BOI> <lo (1[jbocre: {ci BOI} broda]] [[jbocre: noi {brode VAU} ku'o]])1 ku>} VAU])0

jbocre: 09:44 <lindar> gerna pa lo ci broda ku noi brode ku'o

jbocre: 09:44 <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {<(1pa BOI)1 (1lo [jbocre: {ci BOI} broda]] ku)1> <noi (1brode VAU)1 ku'o>} VAU])0

jbocre: 09:44 <vensa> lindar: do YOU hvae the link for this?

jbocre: 09:44 <lindar> No, I have the fucking grammar bot telling me I'm right.

jbocre: 09:44 <lindar> Observe. =D

jbocre: 09:44 <vensa> i c

jbocre: 09:44 <ctino> la poi banli .aleksandr.

jbocre: 09:45 <vensa> I still like to have references :)

jbocre: 09:45 <vensa> nm

jbocre: 09:45 * ctino is happy now

jbocre: 09:45 <vensa> the {la poi} thing is especially demanding a citation IMO

jbocre: 09:45 * vensa looks

jbocre: 09:45 <ctino> Jboski likes it.

jbocre: 09:46 <ctino> So it must be okay to do.

jbocre: 09:46 == lindar has changed nick to la_poi_banli_je_

jbocre: 09:46 <la_poi_banli_je_> Aww! character limit?

jbocre: 09:46 <selckiku> jboski has some weird ideas actually

jbocre: 09:46 == la_poi_banli_je_ has changed nick to lindar

jbocre: 09:46 <vensa> hehe

jbocre: 09:46 <selckiku> omg that name just made my whole irc text shift over

jbocre: 09:46 <Twey> ‘la banli me la .aleksandr.’ I would say

jbocre: 09:46 <lindar> selkik: use a better client =D

jbocre: 09:46 <lindar> Like irssi

jbocre: 09:47 <ctino> But that's so much longer, Twey D:

jbocre: 09:47 <tomoj> http://jbotcan.org/bnf/

jbocre: 09:47 <lindar> My client justifies to the left side of the name, not the right.

jbocre: 09:47 <Twey> gerna la poi banli aleksandr

jbocre: 09:47 <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {la <poi (1banli VAU)1 KU'O> aleksandr} VAU]])0

jbocre: 09:47 * lindar hates clients that do it the other way.

jbocre: 09:47 <tomoj> http://jbotcan.org/bnf/#sumti-6

jbocre: 09:47 <tomoj> "LA # relative-clauses CMENE ... #"

jbocre: 09:48 <vensa> Twey: y u need {me}?

jbocre: 09:49 <ctino> Now the question is: would that be "Alexander the Great", or "The great (in fashion) Alexander" ?

jbocre: 09:49 <ctino> I guess it's pretty much the same thing.

jbocre: 09:49 <vensa> it is IMO

jbocre: 09:49 <lindar> It doesn't say in the names chapter.

jbocre: 09:50 <lindar> http://dag.github.com/cll/6/12/

jbocre: 09:50 <Ledgebin> je

jbocre: 09:50 <Ledgebin> kenra?

jbocre: 09:50 <vensa> http://dag.github.com/cll/8/6/

jbocre: 09:50 <vensa> on the bottom

jbocre: 09:50 <ctino> What's with the freakin' cancer.

jbocre: 09:50 <vensa> but I have ye to find {la poi}

jbocre: 09:52 <Ledgebin> what does .uinai mean?

jbocre: 09:52 <Ledgebin> no?

jbocre: 09:52 <ctino> Unhappy.

jbocre: 09:52 <Ledgebin> aha ty

jbocre: 09:52 <ctino> No problem.

jbocre: 09:52 == tajys jbocre: [email protected] has quit jbocre: Quit: Leaving

jbocre: 09:52 <vensa> selckiku: do you remembet where you read the {la poi} stuff?

jbocre: 09:53 <tomoj> it's right there in the bnf

jbocre: 09:53 <selckiku> vensa, not really.. a zillion discussions about it i think

jbocre: 09:53 <ctino> Haha. I can imagine a little kid who's not getting what they want and screaming "nai nai nai nai NAI!" at the top of their lungs.

jbocre: 09:53 <selckiku> we go around in circles on the same tracks, i'm used to every stop

jbocre: 09:54 <lindar> Ledgebin: kenra means cancer... you are very strange for saying cancer over and over again.

jbocre: 09:54 <vensa> tomoj: the bnf is not self explanatory

jbocre: 09:54 * ctino agrees with lindar

jbocre: 09:54 <tomoj> no

jbocre: 09:54 <tomoj> it just proves that these sentences are grammatical

jbocre: 09:54 <vensa> true

jbocre: 09:54 == tajys jbocre: [email protected] has joined #lojban

jbocre: 09:54 <vensa> but it's not CLL :)

jbocre: 09:54 <tomoj> I see only one meaningful interpretation though

jbocre: 09:54 <vensa> I agree

jbocre: 09:55 <vensa> still, it dont hurt to ask

jbocre: 09:55 <tomoj> hmm

jbocre: 09:55 <tomoj> but can you say "Thomas (who incidentally was doubting), ..."

jbocre: 09:56 <tomoj> no {ku}

jbocre: 09:56 <Ledgebin> kenra?

jbocre: 09:56 <Ledgebin> vensa: hi

jbocre: 09:56 <Ledgebin> how do i do this

jbocre: 09:56 <Ledgebin> i cant understanding

jbocre: 09:57 <vensa> tomoj: isnt that what {la tomas noi senpi} means be default?

jbocre: 09:57 <Ledgebin> uhm

jbocre: 09:57 <selckiku> do na kakne lo nu do nu jimpe

jbocre: 09:57 <tomoj> who knows?

jbocre: 09:57 <tomoj> the CLL doesn't specify

jbocre: 09:57 <ctino> vensa: that looks correct to me.

jbocre: 09:57 <vensa> I thought that's what lindar implied

jbocre: 09:58 <Ledgebin> lnder

jbocre: 09:58 <tomoj> {la tomas noi senpi} could either be "'Thomas', who incidentally doubts", or "'Thomas who Incidentally Doubts'"

jbocre: 09:58 <Ledgebin> timojbo

jbocre: 09:58 <vensa> I think it's implied because of auto-cmevla-termination

jbocre: 09:58 <ctino> No.

jbocre: 09:59 <vensa> so, the correlation should hold

jbocre: 09:59 <ctino> Because the cmevla terminates...

jbocre: 09:59 <tomoj> right

jbocre: 09:59 <ctino> As vensa says.

jbocre: 09:59 <tomoj> that's a valid interpretation

jbocre: 09:59 <tomoj> but the CLL doesn't say this

jbocre: 09:59 <vensa> {lo broda ku noi brode} ~= {la cmevlas noi brode}

jbocre: 09:59 <tomoj> I think that's good though

jbocre: 09:59 <ctino> But jboski does.

jbocre: 09:59 <vensa> tomoj: another point for the BPFK to discuss

jbocre: 09:59 <tomoj> if you want the relative clause as part of the name, put it before the cmene

jbocre: 09:59 <Ledgebin> i mi na jimpe

jbocre: 09:59 <vensa> I'll put that in my discussion topics as well

jbocre: 09:59 <selckiku> theoretically, if the BPFK discussed points

[[jbocre: {CODE}{CODE(wrap="1]][jbocre: 18:45]] <vensa> hi, in continuation to an earlier topic today, I think I found another way to "get around" the problem of adding NOI to a cmevla name.

jbocre: 18:46 <vensa> {la poi banli ku'o aleksander} was the first approach

jbocre: 18:46 <vensa> but you couldnt say the Alexander first

jbocre: 18:46 <vensa> but... how about {la me la aleksander noi banli}

jbocre: 18:47 <vensa> gerna la me la aleksander noi banli

jbocre: 18:47 <gerna> (0[[jbocre: {la <me (1[jbocre: la aleksander|la aleksander]] [[jbocre: noi {banli VAU} KU'O]])1 ME'U> KU} VAU])0

jbocre: 18:47 <vensa> seems like the {noi} still attaches INSIDE the {ku}.

jbocre: 18:47 <vensa> however, does it carry the same meaning?


jbocre: 18:48 == Zarutian jbocre: [email protected] has joined #lojban

jbocre: 18:48 == cirzgamanti` jbocre: [email protected] has quit jbocre: Ping timeout: 260 seconds

jbocre: 18:49 == cirzgamanti` jbocre: [email protected] has joined #lojban

jbocre: 18:53 <@xalbo> Interesting, weird, and complicated. But it looks like it works.

jbocre: 18:55 <vensa> yay!

jbocre: 18:55 <vensa> I guess Id use it just for styling

jbocre: 18:55 <vensa> but ki'e la xalbo{CODE}

Note: it is also grammatical to say {la PA la .aleksander. noi banli} as per hapter 6 Section 9 whatisarelation, which gives as the name {la .aleksander. noi banli}, not {me la .aleksander. noi banli} (though a reasonable audience would probably ignore the {me} part of the name), and does not imply that there is something called {aleksander} (though, again, a reasonable audience would understand).

Retrieved from "https://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=relative_Clauses_with_Cmevla&oldid=75907"