Re: THEORY: Deriving adjectives from nouns

> i handle all 46 predicate-argument (p-a) relators (r) in 3 possible degre=
es=20
> of integration and in either p-r-a or a-r-p order, as a first, upper leve=
l of=20
> semantic roles.
> tunu does partially the same with only 20 roles or so because that's abou=
t=20
> what my human brain can handle : i tried hard but 46 is impossible to spe=
ak=20
> for me.
> marcos' adjectives are much to vague for tunuan people.
> can't remember how many joshua's danov=EBn uses but anyway he claims they=
 are=20
> useless in the dark-side of semantics.
How many of what?  I'm not sure what your relators and degrees of integrati=
on
are.  Regarding the "pretty little girls' school", a brief analysis of the
phrase reveals that there are exactly 10 possible interpretations which mak=
e
sense in English, given the word order and the position of the genetive, so
I'm wondering where you get 46 and Lojban gets 40.  In the abscence of the
above constraints there are 60 patterns which Danoven/Aroven supports, assu=
ming
that all links are "external".  I remember the words "talkerly beautiful"
from Lojban -- have patterns of this type been counted in those 40?  As I
was explaining to Marcos on Saturday Aroven does not treat these as adjecti=
ves
or adverbs; instead they are regarded as separate from the actual statement=
,
a sort of additional commentary on a link or the statement as a whole.
E.g. a perplexingly high success rate -- a success rate which is high, and
  the degree of its highness (redundant in this case) is perplexing.
Or   interestingly, he didn't show up =3D he didn't show up. This is intere=
sting.
That, or this "talkerly beautiful" corresponds to Aroven relative links, e.=
g.
  "beautiful, for a talker" (not very correct in this case, but other conce=
pts
  such as "aln" (long) are ONLY relative.  However, English doesn't support
  either of these patterns (implicitly, maybe...), so I don't see how the
  "pretty little girls' school" could be reasonably interpreted in these wa=
ys.
=20
Here, though, Arov=EBn would of course prefer to simply define a new word,
tinv=EByluby=EBlvi=F1, and leave it at that; maybe that's what you were ref=
erring
to above.  An Arov=EBn phrase really is the direct, literal sum of its part=
s;
so for a specific, known thought element it is usually more practical to gi=
ve
it a distinct word of its own; it is less ambiguous and somewhat more compa=
ct
to use already-agreed-upon words than to try to redefine your element each =
time:
"Who was that on the phone just now?"
"Oh, our next-door neighbor with the long dark hair and green eyes who work=
s
 at the post office and has two kids and..."
"'Jane', then."
"In a word."

=20
Josh

        _/_/      _/_/  _/_/_/_/   Joshua Shinavier            =20
         _/        _/  _/         Loorenstrasse 74, Zimmer B321=20
        _/        _/  _/_/_/_/   CH-8053 Z=FCrich              =20
 _/    _/  _/    _/        _/   Switzerland                 =20
_/_/_/_/  _/_/_/_/  _/_/_/_/   jshinavi@g26.ethz.ch

Danov=EBn pages: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/5555/ven.htm