relative Clauses with Cmevla
{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(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
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).