Talk:Stub: Berry lessons
1,Gleki Arxokuna:
[Again, a (perhaps new) CAhA seems like a better way to express this relationship than {sei} and {fau}. {sei vudbi fau lo nu mi megdo rupnu ponse kei mi ricfu} ⇒ {mi ricfu VUDBI-CAhA lo nu mi megdo rupnu ponse}, where VUDBI-CAhA might need to be a new word. To preserve the {BRODA TENSE x} ⇒ {ca x TENSE BRODA} relationship, this vudbi-CAhA would have to be something like "[main bridi] would necessarily occur if [tagged event]" -- triliyn]
Gleki Arxokuna:
this solutions existed. it's actually {bi'ai} in the beginning of this section.
Gleki Arxokuna:
However, kanpe doesnt have such a place. And everything relies on {kanpe}.
2,Gleki Arxokuna:
triliyn: {broda fau lo nu brode} is kinda like {broda gi'e brode} except without the assertion of {brode} (except maybe it does because of {fasnu})
(closer to {ge broda gi brode} actually, since there's no shared bridi head))
3,Gleki Arxokuna:
[{ca'a} here is a placeholder for a new proposed word, I think? It would be less confusing to make this explicit. -- triliyn]
Gleki Arxokuna:
I agree. It's a new word. It should be very vague.
4,Jacob Errington:
da'i doesn't technically create a rightward scope like we would want it to, but we're treating da'i as a bridi operator nonetheless (the irrealis UI do this). Let's just say for a minute that da'i is in TAG, then wouldn't we need to say {.i fau lo nu mi rupnu megdo ponse kei da'i ku mi gleki} in other to have the correct scope?
In other words, we want the fau-clause, which tells us which world we're in, to scope over the da'i-clause, which tells us that the world we're in is imagined.
Gleki Arxokuna:
if da'i is a tag then{da'iku mi gleki} is the same as {da'i mi gleki} when da'i is UI. Well, may be you can explain how da'i should work? I'd prefer UI solution. currently i can see only criticism from you but not a solution.
Jacob Errington:
The problem is that in your example, the da'i appears to be scoping over the fau-clause, whereas I think that the fau-clause should scope over the da'i. In terms of imaginary journeys, we need to travel into the fau-seltcita before we go into the imagination, pe'i. My solution would be to make the «travel to imagination» word a formal bridi operator (CAhA / BAI, what have you), but keep da'i around for the simple cases.
5,Jacob Errington:
Here I have to agree with latro'a's objection in IRC which I paste:
"This is now clean enough that I can state di'e not as an insurmountable
obstacle. you're counting worlds that aren't in the sentence. this is implicit in such
statements as {so'e}. which worlds do you count? why do they count? how similar are they required to be to reality? less of a problem: you should be using {ro fanbu} and similar
instead of {ro da}, since my cat is not a universe."
Gleki Arxokuna:
>>>which worlds do you count? why do they count? how similar are they required to be to reality?
in this world someone is scratching. {da = lo nu de sraku}. All hypothetical worlds lead to this observable event {da = lo nu de sraku}. What are those hypothetical worlds? Those that represent the event {tu mlatu}.
{ro nu de sraku cu fanbu lo nu tu mlatu}
{tu mlatu fau ro da}
Hm. Actually da'i should be in {tu mlatu} clause, right?
6,Gleki Arxokuna:
In all of these cases, a (possibly new?) CAhA seems like a better idea than {sei broda} for any {broda}. {sei cumki ti mlatu} ⇒ {ti nu'o ja pu'o mlatu} -- triliyn
7,Gleki Arxokuna:
doesn't work. it's {ju'o}. Find more example of bi'ai/romue'i !
8,Gleki Arxokuna:
move them to where they should belong
9,Gleki Arxokuna:
move them to where they should belong
10,Gleki Arxokuna:
copyright la latro'a ;)
11,Gleki Arxokuna:
we might wanna not go so crazy with djica-ka
as latro'a pointed out it gives only a slight benefit in those cases when plural entities want similar events.
like "you and I both want to eat apples" where you care to emphasize that they're different apples
On the other hand it screws with the more important case which is expressing desire for events that you're not involved in.
12,la selpa'i ku:
If ca'a = fi'o se tolxanri, then ca'anai = fi'o na se tolxanri.
Any reasons you dislike ca'a = fi'o fatci ?
Regardless of this, fi'o se xanri doesn't work anyway, because then ca'a lo nu broda means that lo nu broda is the imaginer of the main event. You don't want xanri2 as a tag.
Gleki Arxokuna:
mi na pu pilno lu fi'o fatci li'u ki'u lo nu la latro'a pu na nelci vau u'i i ly pu cusku lo nu zo fatci na skicu lo fasnu