"This" in the piggy rhyme introduces a new toe precisely because it is accompanied by (or accompanies -- I'm no longer sure which come first -- in fact, I think they are simultaneous) the gripping of a new toe. That is, deixis may be either linguistic -- referring to another word -- or extralinguistic, as in this case. jan Ote is overemphasizing the backward linguistic use: 'ni' is also used to refer forward, as in the classic 'tan ni: S' construction. But, as you might expect, these uses are constrained by context and the back reference is the most common (or, at least, the default mode).
The fact that tp does not require number, tense, etc. opens the possibility of noting how often these categories are unnecessary or meaningless or positively misleading. Speakers of languages that do require them tend to start using them unnecessarily in tp and gradually come to let them go -- often with a visible sense of release. The experience in Loglan/Lojban has been progressively toward a reduction in plurals and tense forms, even among newbies, who now come in knowing that these are optional.
Noun classes, olin and "pona tawa"
Re: Noun classes, olin and "pona tawa"
toki pi jan Kipo li sona li pona mute.
Re: Noun classes, olin and "pona tawa"
I think why this wouldn't work without pointing is that there is no toki pona "that" to contrast with "this". I would only understand this as "I see the worker. He is not working."janMato wrote: Re: jan ni vs ona jan vs jan as tools for expressing anaphora
I would guess that "jan ni" give me a sense that I'm not talking about what came before.
me lukin e jan pali. jan ni li pali ala. I see a working man. (on the other hand) This (other) man is not working.
And as usual, this TP sentence has mutliple readings and one of them is, "I see the worker, he (the specific person, or nearby person) is not working."
The best contrast I know of would be:
me lukin e jan pali. jan ante li pali ala.