Extended Lojban Grammar (ToDo)

From Lojban
(Redirected from ELG: Subjunctives in detail)
Jump to: navigation, search

Expansion of logical connections

ba'e

"bu ... Combines with the previous word to make a Lojban letteral, provided that it is not one of the quote cmavo (ZO, ZOI, LOhU, LEhU) or one of the erasure cmavo (SI, SA, SU), ZEI, BAhE, or FAhO."

namely removing the confusing language about "binding", clarifying {za'e}'s notes about magic and duplicating it to {ba'e}, and adding a note to the BPFK section that the parsers may be wrong

zi'o

zi'o poi broda is a nice construct cutting out unnecessary parts from a non-existent place. Thus it states that the place is applicable only to broda.

Levels of Politeness in Lojban

Subjunctives

Subjunctives

Developer version contains 2 realizations of imaginary mood (P, imagination), 7 realizations of possible-events mood (P, potentiality) and two realizations of context mood (R, environment, world). For end users we propose using da'inai/da'i and fau. All variants:

R. fau/nu'o/pu'i - fanbu/xo'i nu'o (short rafsi -nu'o-)/xo'i pu'i (short rafsi -pus-) - sei fatci/sei tolfatci(??)

P (main clause). da'inai/da'i - sei tolxanri/sei xanri

P (fau clause). nocu'o/so'ocu'o/su'ocu'o/so'ecu'o/rocu'o - nomu'ei/so'omu'ei/su'omu'ei/so'emu'ei/romue'i - narcumki/narlakne/cumki/lakne/vudbi - ka'enai/???/ka'e/???/nakuka'enaku - narcumki/narlakne/cumki/lakne/narnarcumki - ka'enai/???/ka'e/???/bi'ai - je'unai/la'anai/la'acu'i/la'a/je'u

  • fanbu is an experimental gismu (see description below)
  • vudbi is an experimental gismu (easy mnemonics: vudbi ~= "would be" ~= 必 bì).
  • The second place of cumki/lakne/vudbi is ignored because it makes no sense if we assume that they can be semantically derived from kanpe.
  • We won't use CAhA because otherwise we'd have to remember two sets of words: gismu and tags.
  • {ca'a} is a mystery as of now.

ToDo

in order of importance

1. mi na pacna lo nu do morsi

I don't hope you die (and you probably didn't yet!)''

2. 15:30:51 - latro`a: x1 is the real causal effect that would make x2 bring about x3 were x2 to happen

15:31:00 - latro`a: involves one thing that is in reality

15:31:23 - latro`a: that seems to be the clincher that has been missing for me with the other subjunctive work

15:33:42 - latro`a: lo nu mi djica lo nu citka lo plise cu broda lo da'i nu mi ponse lo banzu rupnu vau lo nu mi te vecnu lo plise

15:34:02 - latro`a: "The fact that I want to eat an apple means that if I had enough money I would buy an apple"

lo da'inai nu mi plise djica cu se rinka lo nu mi tevecnu lo plise gi'o mi ponse lo rupnu

''

  • 15:50:54 - arxokuna: 15:49:25 - latro`a: there's the real reason, which lives in the real world and is untouched in the imaginary world
  • 15:50:54 - arxokuna: 15:49:38 - latro`a: and then there are the two events, the cause and the effect, which live only in the imaginary world
  • 15:51:29 - latro`a: va'i pe'i
  • 15:52:11 - latro`a: a statement only involving hypothetical events (e.g. "If I had the money I would buy an apple") is incomplete, because it doesn't make it clear what that actually means about reality
  • 15:52:56 - latro`a: in terms of this broda it leaves the broda1 up to context, which is fine if it's obvious, but in lojban that means it should be zo'e, not just altogether absent
  • 15:53:10 - latro`a: if it's relevant but its value is obvious, then it should have a place
  • 15:55:41 - arxokuna: and then there are the two events, the cause and the effect, which live only in the imaginary world <-- da da'inai rinka lo da'i nu de rinka de
  • 15:55:50 - arxokuna: 15:55:41 - arxokuna: and then there are the two events, the cause and the effect, which live only in the imaginary world <-- da da'inai rinka lo da'i nu de rinka *di*
  • 15:55:51 - latro`a: I disagree
  • 15:56:03 - latro`a: or rather, I think that's not a good way of thinking about it
  • 15:56:11 - latro`a: but that it is how you would encode it in existing words
  • 15:56:50 - arxokuna: a statement only involving hypothetical events (e.g. "If I had the money I would buy an apple") is incomplete, because it doesn't make it clear what that actually means about reality <-- if you have .i da'i then yes, it's not clear. but you can mark arbitrary parts of the sentence with da'i or da'inai
  • 15:57:12 - latro`a: if none of the arguments exist, the entire statement is hypothetical
  • 15:57:23 - arxokuna: in terms of this broda it leaves the broda1 up to context, which is fine if it's obvious, but in lojban that means it should be zo'e, not just altogether absent <-- explicitly mark broda with what you need.
  • 15:57:30 - latro`a: neither "I have the money" nor "I buy an apple" are real in this example
  • 15:57:40 - latro`a: hm?
  • 15:57:44 - latro`a: you mean write out its place structure?
  • 15:58:22 - arxokuna: "If I had the money I would buy an apple" - okay. both are hypothetical . then just start it with .i da'i
  • 15:58:39 - arxokuna: for maximum vagueness in causality use fanbu
  • 15:58:59 - latro`a: ...you're missing the original point now -_-

3. we should mention sei fatci together with da'inai.

4. ko'e jai se curmi fai ko'a.

5. By combining fanbu with verbs of kanpe series we can get at least one more useful word. xo'i nu'o = se fanbu da da'i gije na se fanbu x1 is unrealised; x1 shows unrealised potential ra gletu sei xo'i nu'o ra gletu fau da'i da fau da'inai no da She is a virgin. And we also have xo'i pu'i = cumki je fanbu x1 is realised; x1 has realised it's potential fanbu and xo'i pu'i differ only in emphasis as any event first needs to be possible (fau da'i da) in order to become actual (fanbu).

6. Time travellers:

sei na cumki mi zvati ti fau lonu mi pu catra lo mi roryrorci pu lo nu ri rorci lo rorci be mi

I couldn't be here had I killed my grandparent before he/she engendered my parent.

But you can also say:

da'inai mi pu catra lo mi roryrorci pu lo nu ri rorci lo rorci be mi ije ku'i .ue mi za'o zvati ti
I did actually kill my grandparent before he/she engendered my parent, but (surprise!) I'm still here.

7. ...while traveling in Australia this Spring my wife and I heard an Irish comedian tell the following joke:

Pat says to Mike, "Have you heard that Sean O'Casey died?"

"No!" says Mike. "When'd he pass away, then?"

Pat rubs his chin and says: "Well, if he'd a lived 'til next Thursday, he'd have been dead a month!"

I don't think I've ever encountered a clearer instance of a speaker inviting a listener to join him in a private world...in this case, a preposterous one in which Sean O'Casey is visibly both dead and alive. Thus in Pat's subjunctive world, the Law of Excluded Middle is itself set aside. His friend Sean has to be both dead and not dead for this convenient calculation to work!

And yet it does work! That is one of the most elegant things about our use of subjunctive worlds. We can evidently rearrange the "realities" of our external worlds so cleverly as to be able to explore all sorts of fancies in them...sometimes quite useful fancies, such as what one is going to do in an emergency.

8. http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/dai'i

9. What is {ca'a}?

10. subjunctives Mi hapci sukui lepo mi bragai Leslie: means that I might be happy in some world where I am king gleki: perfect sense Leslie: Mi hapci sufeu lepo mi bragai gleki: Mi hapci sufeu lepo mi bragai = ? Leslie: means that I am happy in some world where I am king Leslie: My happines might be possible in the first sentence only after abdication, for example