Re: TECH: se, te, & lujvo

[C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK]

Mark to And:
>
> >(i) seljerna should be stipulated as synonymous with se jerna (unlike
> >lujvo formed from tanru)
>
> >or
>
> >(ii) there ought to be a way of coining a lujvo whose x1 is an idiomatic
> >variant of the x1 of the source gismu (if seljerna has an x1 that is
> >an idiomatic variant of the x2 of the source gismu).
>
> Check me if I'm wrong: this sounds like a revival of the dikyjvo proposal.
> You want a defined way of showing how the lujvo form (selbroda) relates to
> the "tanru" form (se broda).  It's the same ambiguity problem I had a while
> back with {selpinxe}, which was used in the tanru {selpinxe ckafi} to mean
> "beverage coffee", taking {selpinxe} to mean {na'o se pinxe}, while I
> understood it as {caca'a se pinxe}, that is, "drunk coffee".  It's dikyjvo
> all over again; deal with that as you like.
>
No, I don't think it is: it's a little more fundamental than dikyjvo, because
And is asking whether lujvo such as this that are not formed from a true
tanru (with the ambiguity that that introduces) should be treated as having
that ambiguity at all.


                Colin