le broda ku na brode Gotcha: Difference between revisions

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


(If it wasn't obvious, this is a '''draft'''. Please don't cite or quote.)
(repeating from [[jbocre: Gotchas|Gotchas]])


Some points to mention:
See also [[jbocre: naku|naku]].


* This book is the main result of the work of the BPFK
This means "Not all of the brodas are brode". To say the more intuitive "(Each of) the broda(s) are not brode", the negation must be "na ku" and follow the le sumti, "le broda ku na ku brode".
** The BPFK was started in 2003 and ended in --


* This book contains all the vocabulary necessary to read and write Lojban at a basic level. However, many words are omitted, and more are being created all the time.
(''This bit written by And; the rest added anonynously.'' '''No problem admitting the 'Swallowing my annoyance' bit is mine''' --- mi'e [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]])


In the jargon of lexicographers, there is a distinction between “active” and “passive” dictionaries. An active dictionary is geared towards foreign-language users who need to express themselves in the target language. It starts out from a list of foreign-language words and expressions, which it then seeks to give the most accurate equivalents of in the target language. Conversely, a passive dictionary is geared towards readers, and describes what target-language words and expressions mean, using the foreign language.
----


By necessity, this is merely a '''passive''' dictionary. There are several reasons for this. One is that this is, at least in part, a '''normative''' dictionary. The list of the five-letter root words, or ''gismu'', is defined by their English definitions, which have been basically unchanged since 1994. The words that signify a grammatical function, the ''cmavo'', have since 2003 been expanded from terse one-liner mnemonics to full normative definitions in a painstaking effort by the Language Planning Commission (''BPFK''). Thus, this book represents the culmination of the work of completely defining the Lojban language that began in 1987, when The Logical Language Group split from The Loglan Institute.
That doesn't make any sense. And even if it did, it seems broken that that [[elidable terminator|elidable terminator]] can affect the semantics like that.


The other reason is a political one, and has to do with cultural neutrality. A way to make a Lojban dictionary maximally useful would be to open up a few monolingual dictionaries, and find Lojban translations for the entries that are most common. If someone were to put it in this effort, the result would be a dictionary that is heavily skewed towards the kind of things English speakers talk about, and contain none of the words in Lojban that are known to be difficult to translate into English with one word, such as ''dikcti'' or ''se'i''.
----
 
Swallowing my annoyance at anything in [[jbocre: The Book|The Book]] being called into question :-) , I refer you to [http://www.lojban.org/files/reference-grammar/chap16.html] .
 
As it turns out:
 
* le broda na brode = ro le broda na brode = naku ro le broda cu brode = '''naku''' ro le broda zo'u: le broda cu brode = ''It is not true that for all As, A does B.''
** ''na'' has scope over the entire [[jbocre: bridi|bridi]], by default.
 
* le broda naku brode = ro le broda naku brode = ro le broda '''naku''' zo'u: le broda cu brode = ''It is true that for all As, it is '''not''' the case that: A does B.''
** ''na'' has scope over whatever follows ''le broda''
 
''naku'' is a floating sumti, and not a 'tense', like normal ''na''; so this isn't just a matter of an elidable terminator. In fact, in ''ro da naku su'o de na klama'', the two ''na'' are doing quite different jobs; and the ''ku'' is not elidable there at all.
 
Of course, the 'user-friendly' way to approach this is to dodge ''na'' completely, and use ''na'e'' in this case.
 
----
 
This is only an issue if there is more than one of ''le broda''. If there is exactly one, they both mean the same.
 
Also, ''le broda naku brode'' is equivalent to ''no le broda cu brode''.

Revision as of 16:57, 4 November 2013

(repeating from Gotchas)

See also naku.

This means "Not all of the brodas are brode". To say the more intuitive "(Each of) the broda(s) are not brode", the negation must be "na ku" and follow the le sumti, "le broda ku na ku brode".

(This bit written by And; the rest added anonynously. No problem admitting the 'Swallowing my annoyance' bit is mine --- mi'e nitcion)

That doesn't make any sense. And even if it did, it seems broken that that elidable terminator can affect the semantics like that.

Swallowing my annoyance at anything in The Book being called into question :-) , I refer you to [1] .

As it turns out:

  • le broda na brode = ro le broda na brode = naku ro le broda cu brode = naku ro le broda zo'u: le broda cu brode = It is not true that for all As, A does B.
    • na has scope over the entire bridi, by default.
  • le broda naku brode = ro le broda naku brode = ro le broda naku zo'u: le broda cu brode = It is true that for all As, it is not the case that: A does B.
    • na has scope over whatever follows le broda

naku is a floating sumti, and not a 'tense', like normal na; so this isn't just a matter of an elidable terminator. In fact, in ro da naku su'o de na klama, the two na are doing quite different jobs; and the ku is not elidable there at all.

Of course, the 'user-friendly' way to approach this is to dodge na completely, and use na'e in this case.

This is only an issue if there is more than one of le broda. If there is exactly one, they both mean the same.

Also, le broda naku brode is equivalent to no le broda cu brode.

Retrieved from "https://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=le_broda_ku_na_brode_Gotcha&oldid=75254"