quotes without a speaker specified: Difference between revisions

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
 
m (Conversion script moved page Quotes without a speaker specified to quotes without a speaker specified: Converting page titles to lowercase)
 
(5 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:


These are the rules for generating Lojban words. Any speech generated following these rules will be uniquely decomposable by the [[BPFK Section: PEG Morphology Algorithm|PEG Morphology Algorithm]].
[[The Book|The Book]] shows ''sei'' being used in conjunction with ''lu...li'u'', not instead of it. This is good, because otherwise, after a sentence marked with ''[[sei|sei]]'', how can you tell whether the next sentence is narration or a continuation of their utterance?


=== pauses ===
So, a quote '''with''' a speaker specified should be ''lu...sei...li'u'', and a quote without a speaker would be that without the ''sei'' - in other words, simply quoted text. The result is a bare sumti in the sentence, perhaps observing the existence of that quote.


*You '''may not''' pause in the middle of any word.
(If instead you choose to not put dialogue in quotes - as in the script to a play - then I assume unmarked sentences would belong to the most recently named speaker, and narration (or stage directions) would be in ''to'i...toi''.)
*You '''may''' pause between any two words.


*You '''must''' pause in the following cases:
[[rab.spir|rab.spir]]
**Before any word that starts with a vowel or diphthong or y.


**Before and after a cmene.
* That's exactly what I did towards the end of the lessons. In fact, I went one further, I think: .i la djiotis lu coi li'u . Two disconnected sumti. Because you know very well how they are connected already. -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]].
**Between a finally stressed cmavo and a brivla that starts with a cluster.


**Between two cmavo of form CVCy (without an intervening pause) and a string of one or more rafsi (including gismu and fu'ivla as possible final rafsi).
(I disagree. ''sei'' in itself is merely metadiscourse--
**Before and after a non-lojban-word.


=== cmene ===
whether or not the speaker changes, is not specified. If


*A cmene can consist of any number of syllables (possibly none) and must have a final consonant or consonant cluster (details of what is a permissible final cluster still to be worked out).
a new sentence begins, it is of course a continuation of


=== cmavo ===
the previous discourse, unless explicitly changed by ''ni'o''.


*A cmavo consists of a non-h, non-cluster syllable followed by zero or more h-syllables. (Any stress is allowed, but see pause rules.)
This convention for a ''draci se ciska'' is not the only


=== gismu ===
one, of course, but it is workable and not un-''lobykai''.


*A gismu can have either CCVCV or CVC/CV forms, where CC is an initial-pair. The first vowel must be stressed and the second unstressed.
However, I have to address a mere importation of the conventional


=== fu'ivla ===
drama text conventions, which utilize italics and line spaces


*A fu'ivla is any string of non-y syllables such that:
to convey metadiscourse information. In Lojban, such things
**It does not begin with h or with a consonantal-syllable.


**Only the penultimate vocalic syllable is stressed (therefore it must have at least two vocalic syllables).
'''ought to be made explicit'''. An empty line is not a unit of
**The last syllable ends in a vowel or a diphthong.


**It does not begin with a cmavo-form followed by a cmavo, a gismu, a fu'ivla or a lujvo (tosmabru test).
information in Lojban. Italics are explicit and refer only to
**It does not consist of a string of rafsi (lujvo test).


**It does not consist of a consonant followed by a string of rafsi (slinku'i test).
a change in typeface. I realize that any other method will


=== lujvo ===
seem clunky and unnatural, but that's just how it is. The


*A lujvo is any string of two or more rafsi such that:
drama is not a literary form native to Lojbanistan.)
**It has penultimate stress.


**The final rafsi ends in a vowel or diphthong.
So how is this disagreeing? What's not explicit about ''to'i...toi''?
**If the first rafsi is an unstressed CVV-rafsi or is followed by another CVV-rafsi, it must be immediately followed by either an r-hyphen or n-hyphen.


**If the first rafsi is a CVC-rafsi, and the second consonant plus what follows is a lujvo, then the CVC-rafsi must have a y-hyphen.
Or if you're referring to the ''lu...sei...li'u'' form of quotes, a new sentence would certainly continue the discourse because it would still be inside the ''lu...li'u''! But what I'm saying is that if a bare quote with no ''sei'' occurs, the speaker is ''zo'e'' and (as in English text) is most likely the person who spoke the utterance before last.
**Any CVC-rafsi followed by a consonant such that the pair is impermissible requires a y-hyphen.


**gismu and fu'ivla are allowed as final rafsi.
* We already know tense conventions are different in narratives and discussion for Lojban ("story time"). I have no problem with a specific convention arising for Lojban drama, whereby the speaker of bare quotes is assumed to alternate. This is different to normal Lojban talk; but chained quotes as dramatic text is not normal Lojban talk. -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]]
**extended (brivla and fu'ivla) rafsi can only be preceded by y-final rafsi.
 
**extended rafsi that begin with a vowel or diphthong take an {'} if they are preceded by another rafsi.
 
=== rafsi ===
 
*gismu-rafsi have the forms CVCCy, CCVCy, CCV, CVC(y), CVV(r/n). The parenthesized hyphens are always allowed, and sometimes required (see lujvo).
*brivla-rafsi are any y-less brivla, minus the stress, followed by {'y}.
 
*fu'ivla-rafsi is a fu'ivla that end in CV with the V changed to y if
**it is not a string of y-less rafsi plus CVCy or CCy. (lujvy test)
 
**it is not a consonant plus a string of y-less rafsi plus CVCy or CCy. (slinkujy test)

Latest revision as of 08:30, 30 June 2014

The Book shows sei being used in conjunction with lu...li'u, not instead of it. This is good, because otherwise, after a sentence marked with sei, how can you tell whether the next sentence is narration or a continuation of their utterance?

So, a quote with a speaker specified should be lu...sei...li'u, and a quote without a speaker would be that without the sei - in other words, simply quoted text. The result is a bare sumti in the sentence, perhaps observing the existence of that quote.

(If instead you choose to not put dialogue in quotes - as in the script to a play - then I assume unmarked sentences would belong to the most recently named speaker, and narration (or stage directions) would be in to'i...toi.)

rab.spir

  • That's exactly what I did towards the end of the lessons. In fact, I went one further, I think: .i la djiotis lu coi li'u . Two disconnected sumti. Because you know very well how they are connected already. -- nitcion.

(I disagree. sei in itself is merely metadiscourse--

whether or not the speaker changes, is not specified. If

a new sentence begins, it is of course a continuation of

the previous discourse, unless explicitly changed by ni'o.

This convention for a draci se ciska is not the only

one, of course, but it is workable and not un-lobykai.

However, I have to address a mere importation of the conventional

drama text conventions, which utilize italics and line spaces

to convey metadiscourse information. In Lojban, such things

ought to be made explicit. An empty line is not a unit of

information in Lojban. Italics are explicit and refer only to

a change in typeface. I realize that any other method will

seem clunky and unnatural, but that's just how it is. The

drama is not a literary form native to Lojbanistan.)

So how is this disagreeing? What's not explicit about to'i...toi?

Or if you're referring to the lu...sei...li'u form of quotes, a new sentence would certainly continue the discourse because it would still be inside the lu...li'u! But what I'm saying is that if a bare quote with no sei occurs, the speaker is zo'e and (as in English text) is most likely the person who spoke the utterance before last.

  • We already know tense conventions are different in narratives and discussion for Lojban ("story time"). I have no problem with a specific convention arising for Lojban drama, whereby the speaker of bare quotes is assumed to alternate. This is different to normal Lojban talk; but chained quotes as dramatic text is not normal Lojban talk. -- nitcion
Retrieved from "https://mw-live.lojban.org/index.php?title=quotes_without_a_speaker_specified&oldid=99918"