Re: RET: non-connective fa'u

[Goran Topic <topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR>]

> > > > 10. 14.16. (a) Is there a non-connective version of fahu? As in
> > > > "the two men love their respective spouses".
> > > Unfortunately no. Since I have no use for {le'i} and co., I might
> > > start using them for that function.
> >
> > pa'aku? as in
> >
> >     le re nanmu pa'a prami le ri speni
>
> You are right that that is taught somewhere (maybe in the Lessons?)
> as the way to do that, but it goes against logic.

You are, of course, right. I thought it a bit illogical, but I guessed
that you discussed it sometime when I wasn't here yet. And, no, I found
it in the ma'oste. But there is really no excuse for my sloppiness. :)

> It may be true that {le re nanmu cu prami le ri speni} means that
> each loves his own wife, though, without any need for the strange {pa'a}.
> That depends on how exactly {ri} behaves with sumti that have more
> than one referent, which is not yet clear to me.

I think it might be the case: if you can always distribute le/lo into
multiple sentences, then

    le re nanmu cu prami le ri speni

should mean the same as

    pa nanmu cu prami le ri speni .ije pa nanmu cu prami le ri speni .i
    le go'i cu drata le go'e

So I conclude that ri refers to the particular instance, and not to the
whole sumti as-is. The second argument is the way go'i behaves, and why
we have ra'o: prowords (like GOhA and KOhA) refer to the referent of the
word they stand for, and do not just repeat the word. If they would be
reevaluated each time they were encountered, that would be another matter.
This way, I think everything is evaluated only when introduced (with a
non-pro-expression) or when it is explicitly forced (e.g. with ra'o).

co'o mi'e. goran.

--
GAT/CS/O d?@ H s:-@ !g p1(2)@ !au(0?) a- w+(+++) (!)v-@(+) C++(++++)
UU/H(+) P++>++++ L(>+) !3 E>++ N+ K(+) W--(---) M-- !V(--) -po+ Y(+)
t+@(+++) !5 !j R+@ G-@(J++) tv+(++) b++@ D++ B? e+* u@ h!$ f?(+) r--
!n(+@) y+. GeekCode v2.1, modifications left to reader to puzzle out