la phrases

Language learning: How to speak Toki Pona, translation problems, advice, memory aids, tools and methods to learn Toki Pona and other languages faster
Lingva lernado: Kiel paroli Tokiponon, tradukproblemoj, konsiloj, memoraj helpiloj, iloj kaj metodoj por pli rapide lerni Tokiponon kaj aliajn lingvojn
User avatar
janTepanNetaPelin
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 5:14 pm
Location: Berlin

Re: la phrases

Postby janTepanNetaPelin » Tue Aug 29, 2017 7:53 am

jan_Lope wrote:
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:But you're OK with:
"at good human cause" = "because of a friend"


I'm not OK with this. Why do you think that?


Why? Please have a look:

janTepanNetaPelin wrote:
jan_Lope wrote:But a "pi" phrase is not necessary here.
pona!


So, you're OK with:
* "tan jan pona la" = "at good human cause" (with "tan" as a noun, but without "pi")

But you are not OK with:
* "tan jan pona la" = "because of a friend" (with "tan" as a preposition)


So, why? I'm trying to make sense of your statement that la-phrases don't start with a preposition. It means that "tan jan pona la" (which, as you said, doesn't require a "pi"(-phrase)), means "because of a friend" with "tan" being a noun. Therefore, "tan jan pona la" would be literally "at good human cause". Therefore, "at good human cause" = "because of a friend".

Now that you say that you're not OK with "at good human cause" = "because of a friend", aren't you OK with "tan jan pona la" with "tan" as a noun either?

Apart from that, this question remains:

janTepanNetaPelin wrote:Besides, any remarks on the fact that Sonja uses prepositions at the beginning of la-phrases?
jan Tepan: "o pilin pona o pu!"
https://github.com/stefichjo/toki-pona

jan_Lope
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:30 pm
Location: mi lon ma tomo Pelin.
Contact:

Re: la phrases

Postby jan_Lope » Tue Aug 29, 2017 7:53 am

jan TepanNetaPelin o, toki!

janTepanNetaPelin wrote:Besides, any remarks on the fact that Sonja uses prepositions at the beginning of la-phrases?


I've started my lesson based on jan Pije's lessons ( http://tokipona.net/tp/janpije/index.php ) and improved my lessons. Sonja published her book later. I try to fit my lessons to Sonja's book also. But most important for me is the golden Toki Pona rule: "Keep it as simple as possible." Logic is a good way to keep something simple. And I try to fit to general grammar rules.

If it is a good reason to use preposition at the beginning of a "la" phrase I'll use it too. But I can't see a reason.
pona!
jan Lope
https://jan-lope.github.io
(Lessons and the Toki Pona Parser - A tool for spelling, grammar check and ambiguity check of Toki Pona)

On my foe list are the sockpuppets janKipo and janSilipu because of permanent, rude spamming.

User avatar
janTepanNetaPelin
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 5:14 pm
Location: Berlin

Re: la phrases

Postby janTepanNetaPelin » Tue Aug 29, 2017 8:30 am

jan_Lope wrote:jan TepanNetaPelin o, toki!

janTepanNetaPelin wrote:Besides, any remarks on the fact that Sonja uses prepositions at the beginning of la-phrases?


I've started my lesson based on jan Pije's lessons ( http://tokipona.net/tp/janpije/index.php ) and improved my lessons. Sonja published her book later. I try to fit my lessons to Sonja's book also. But most important for me is the golden Toki Pona rule: "Keep it as simple as possible." Logic is a good way to keep something simple. And I try to fit to general grammar rules.

If it is a good reason to use preposition at the beginning of a "la" phrase I'll use it too. But I can't see a reason.


Your "Toki Pona Lessons" start with

These lessons are based on the offical Toki Pona book of Sonja Lang ( tokipona.org ) and the lessons of jan Pije ( tokipona.net/tp/janpije ).


That's not accurate. It is misleading. (That is, unless your understanding of "based on" is like "based on a true story" or "it is a grammar book, too!") See, you are very selective in your "being based on", which is quite the opposite of being "based on". You're trying to change Toki Pona as you see fit. That wouldn't be a problem in itself, as long as you declare your project accordingly, but you're hiding behind names like jan Pije and jan Sonja, and frankly I have lost interest in following your personal toki nasa as it is willingly un-pu.
jan Tepan: "o pilin pona o pu!"
https://github.com/stefichjo/toki-pona

User avatar
jan Alanto
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 12:18 pm

Re: la phrases

Postby jan Alanto » Tue Aug 29, 2017 3:28 pm

jan Lope o!

I'm starting to get your perspective on the grammar of toki pona. As your lessons are actually based on Pije's old lessons, with a similar terminology, you had to adapt them to Sonja's new decisions and grammar, and interpret them as still being part of the old way of viewing toki pona's grammar, leading to those errors I'm actually not tired of appointing.

For example, in lesson 6, Sonja clearly mentions an adjective can be used to modify a verb. Apparently (influenced by Pije's lessons or native language grammar) you take it in this case to be an adverb. When she first defined "adjective", she hadn't presented the verbs yet, so it wouldn't make sense to say, while defining them, they also modify verbs (and adjectives, for instance, as stated later), but they do and that's explicit in her text.

In the examples you've given, the prepositions are on a position we had earlier learned to be of verbs. But "tan" is not a verb here, instead it's "being used as a verb" (Lesson 7). It's not one though. The immediate example she gives of the construction "X ala X" uses a noun. She hadn't opened yet the possibility of nouns becoming verbs and it does not have a verbal meaning in any way ("Does she parents?" why not just "Is she a parent?").

Moreover, the position after "li", "mi", or "sina" is not exclusively a verb, because it's taught earlier that it can be also a noun and an adjective. You only think that it should be a verb because in your lessons, you teach that "li" precedes a verb. And you work around the cases with nouns and adjectives by saying there is a hidden verb "to be" to justify them, an explication not supported in the Book.

So why do prepositions have to become verbs? Why isn't there a verb "to be" before them, just as in the case with nouns and adjectives?

Also, if we consider the prepositions to be verbs in the examples you've given, they can't have their prepositional object, because it's required that they are prepositions to have a noun after it to be its object. Being verbs, those sentences actually mean "Do you originate earthly Germanly?" and "The worker uses usefully." You claim that there is "from" after "originate", but that's the preposition "tan", so "sina tan ala tan tan ma Tosi?" could mean what's intended. Note that those verbs lack objects in the former sentences, which should be marked by "e", as verbal objects do. What do they mean if they are a verbal position, no one knows, because Sonja didn't opened that possibility. Your guess is that they mean the same as their corresponding preposition "sina tan ala tan e ma Tosi?". That's not necessary, since we can just put the preposition in the position of the verb and say "sina tan ala tan ma Tosi?" just as Sonja does.

jan_Lope wrote:Other word lists are better

Other word lists don't exactly represent the official view on grammar and semantics. Just compare the old and new meanings of "anpa" and "noka".

jan_Lope wrote:the first slot in a "la" phrase is mostly for a noun or pronoun

That's consequence of there being more nouns than prepositions. There's only one case of 'la' with a noun before it (besides a possible general case which may have the same meaning as this): ... la = lon ... (this comprises 'tenpo' expressions, too, because 'tenpo' is a noun primarily)

jan_Lope wrote:tan jan seme la sina pu? - noun adjective seme as adjective la ...
(Which is the human cause ...?)

you think "tan" can be a preposition here also. But how can we distinguish whether it is a noun or preposition?

That's why I don't even consider "tan" to be a noun. If I did, I couldn't differentiate between the cases and *irony mark* the reader would have to guess if I mean "in what human cause" or "because of what human", because it isn't clear enough what I really want to say and the phrase "in a cause" makes sense *end of ironic statement (sorry lol)* (and it doesn't mean "principle, goal", because that's "tawa", "nasin", or "lawa")

jan_Lope wrote:mi moku e moku, kepeken ilo moku li moku e telo, kepeken poki.

This sentence has two verb phrases with a prepositional object each: "moku e moku, kepeken ilo moku" and "moku e telo, kepeken poki" ("kepeken" is a preposition in each verb phrases).
If you put one of this prepositional object in a "la" phrase you will break up the corresponding verb phrase. You can't see to wich verb phrase is the prepostion connected to.

This relation doesn't need to be reciprocal. "mi moku e moku kepeken ilo moku" = "kepeken ilo moku la mi moku e moku." isn't equivalent to "mi moku e moku kepeken ilo moku li moku e telo kepeken poki." = "kepeken ilo moku la mi moku e moku li moku e telo kepeken poki." That's not a case covered in the Book, but I believe that if I put a preposition before la in a sentence with two verb phrases, then it will apply to both of them. In that case you can't put one of the prepositions before 'la', unless you're actually using both "ilo moku" and "poki" to "moku e telo", like in
"mi moku e moku kepeken ilo moku li moku e telo kepeken ilo moku kepeken poki" or, longer
"mi moku e moku kepeken ilo moku li moku e telo kepeken ilo moku li moku e telo kepeken poki".

I can also say "mi moku e moku kepeken ilo moku lon tenpo ni li moku e telo kepeken poki lon tenpo ni." There's no need to use "tenpo ni la". You can even put "kin" after the second verb phrase to make it specifically clear that it's the same "ni".

jan_Lope wrote:"tenpo" is a noun here

"tenpo" is almost always a noun, especially because there it's in an expression equivalent to "lon tenpo" which indeed obligues it to be a noun. It's 100% certain it couldn't be a preposition.

"kepeken ilo sitelen la jan li ken sitelen lon lipu" could mean
"in the pictorial usage of a tool one can write on paper." (or
"in the pictorial useful usage one can write on paper.", if "ilo" is considered an adjective and
"pictorially usefully usefully, one can write on paper." if we consider "kepeken" to be an adjective.)

"kulupu pali li kepeken seme?" means
"the work group uses what-ly?" if "kepeken" is a verb (what-ly is like an adverbial form of 'what', probably "how". It could be answered with "pona" (uses well), "nasa" (uses strangely) etc.)
"the work group is what usage?" (if a group can be a usage lol and "kepeken" is a verb)

in order for that sentence to mean "what does the group uses?" it must have a preposition: "kepeken seme?" = "with (using) what?" without a verb, like Sonja does ="the group (is) with (using) what?" = "the group uses what?"
Or, as you insist it should be a verb, there must be "e": "kulupu pali li kepeken e seme?" (what does the group uses?) which is ungrammatical because prepositions aren't verbs.

It's your turn.

User avatar
jan Alanto
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 12:18 pm

Re: la phrases

Postby jan Alanto » Tue Aug 29, 2017 3:37 pm

janTepanNetaPelin wrote:I have lost interest in following your personal toki nasa as it is willingly un-pu.

Wow, that was harsh. I don't have proof that he uses un-pu grammar. He continues replying using pu rules. Maybe the way he expresses them is different, but I think there's no rule that can't be implied by it. Maybe he prohibits things implicitly permitted by pu, but those implications depend on the reader's perspective.

User avatar
janTepanNetaPelin
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 5:14 pm
Location: Berlin

Re: la phrases

Postby janTepanNetaPelin » Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:55 am

jan Alanto wrote:
janTepanNetaPelin wrote:I have lost interest in following your personal toki nasa as it is willingly un-pu.

Wow, that was harsh. I don't have proof that he uses un-pu grammar. He continues replying using pu rules. Maybe the way he expresses them is different, but I think there's no rule that can't be implied by it. Maybe he prohibits things implicitly permitted by pu, but those implications depend on the reader's perspective.


Please have a look at this statement of Lope:

jan_Lope wrote:I try to fit my lessons to Sonja's book also. But most important for me is the golden Toki Pona rule: "Keep it as simple as possible." Logic is a good way to keep something simple. And I try to fit to general grammar rules.

If it is a good reason to use preposition at the beginning of a "la" phrase I'll use it too. But I can't see a reason.


In other words, when he doesn't like something, he won't include it in his grammar. If I had known that from the start, I would have wished him good luck with his project before. But I remembered this misleading sentence from his lessons:

These lessons are based on the offical Toki Pona book of Sonja Lang ( tokipona.org ) and the lessons of jan Pije ( tokipona.net/tp/janpije ).


But he isn't trying to base his grammar on the Official Book. And we're save to assume that he fully understands how la-phrases can start with a preposition. It's just that he doesn't like it, or as he might put it: there is no good reason or it's illogical. So you might as well save your breath trying to explain to him how la-phrases work. I may have been harsh, but I want to be as clear as possible that I don't want to participate in this charade.
jan Tepan: "o pilin pona o pu!"
https://github.com/stefichjo/toki-pona

jan_Lope
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:30 pm
Location: mi lon ma tomo Pelin.
Contact:

Re: la phrases

Postby jan_Lope » Thu Aug 31, 2017 5:57 am

jan Alanto o, toki!

Many thanks for your comments.

Sonja wrote that adjectives can modify verbs (pu page 28). I can't agree with that. Adverbs can modify verbs. As I wrote I try to use general grammar terms. jan Pije used the term adverb too.

The translation of the sentence "ona li mama ala mama?" is wrong in pu page 32, because "mama" is a verb here. Sonja wrote very clearly that before and after "ala" has to be a verb. The translation is "Does she mother (somebody)? Does she wet-nurse (somebody)?". Sonja confirmed this error to me via email. So "tan is a verb here also: "sina tan ala tan ma Tosi?" (pu page 64).

As I wrote in my lessons after "li" can be a verb, a noun and an adjective. Only for a better understanding I use the term "missing be".
OK, after "li" is a prepositional object possible because the "missing be". So a preposition can be after "li". I 'll change my lessons and parser in this way next.


I think the general difference in our views is you think that some word type can be a little like other word types. But how many percent is this word a preposition and how many percent is this word a verb for example?
For me a word can only be 100% one word type. This word type is only depends on the its position in the sentence. This point of view is much clearer and simpler than your complicated constructions of "depends on the postion and being something other depends on the word".
What is with the words with several word types in the pu word list? For example "sona": How many percent is it a verb and how many percent is it a preverb if you use "sona" as a noun?
For example the sentence "mi moku e moku." In your view both "moku" are verbs (more or less??), because "moku" is in pu's word list a verb. This is very strange for me.
You better get rid of that superfluous ballast. It only brings new contradictions. "Simplify your thoughts. Less is more." (pu page 9). Or with other words: Keep it as simple as possible.

Maybe "pu" is a little vague sometimes. Other lessons are clearer in some points. In my point of view jan Pije's lesons are far away from your point of view: http://tokipona.net/tp/janpije/okamasona6.php : For example "lon can be used as both a verb and a preposition (and so can tawa and kepeken, as you'll learn below)."

Please see other lessons too:
- http://www.albanocruz.com/ext/tokipona/ ... kipona.pdf
- https://ru.wikibooks.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D0 ... 0%B8%D0%B5
- http://tokipona.info/Vortaro

"A noun is a word for a person, place or thing" (pu page 17). A preposition can't be this. "A verb is a word that express an action being done to a noun" (pu page 25). A preposition can't be this.

I agree with Sonja: "Prepositions can be used at the end of a sentence" (pu page 34). But "la" phrases can be used at the begin of a sentence.

Please let me now what you think about this.
pona!
jan Lope
https://jan-lope.github.io
(Lessons and the Toki Pona Parser - A tool for spelling, grammar check and ambiguity check of Toki Pona)

On my foe list are the sockpuppets janKipo and janSilipu because of permanent, rude spamming.

janKipo
Posts: 2816
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:20 pm

Re: la phrases

Postby janKipo » Thu Aug 31, 2017 9:28 am

This seems to be mainly terminological: POS terminology is used in at least three ways in much tp discussion and Lope wants to restrict it to just of these -- the role a word is playing in place. Even this may not be a clear as might be, since he allows that, at least in the "verb slot" (at the beginning of a predicate, immediately. after 'li' or a modal), virtually any role is possible, without further indication (except the not very useful invisible "be'). This is a reasonable position to take. The main virtues of the dictionary POS is to provide a clue about role in obscure cases and to explain (somewhat) the meaning of a word when not in its home category.
All that really remains as a problem here is whether prepositions can occur at the beginning of 'la' phrases (the original issue, then, despite many detours. Lope takes a position (for which I can find no justification in. pu or Pije or logic) that only nouns can start sentences, even those beginning with 'la' phrases.m Happily, this does not exclude any 'la' phrases we might want, since any string of two or more words (excluding particles) can be viewed as a noun with modifiers. It makes working out what such 'la' phrases mean a little harder (though it usually comes out about right), but doesn't otherwise mess up the grammar. I suspect it also stifles creativity, but that is a different concern, not for this thread.

User avatar
jan Alanto
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 12:18 pm

Re: la phrases

Postby jan Alanto » Thu Aug 31, 2017 10:41 pm

jan Lope o, toki! toki sina ni li pona mute tawa mi. mi kama sona mute tan toki ni. mi wile e ni: sina kin li kama sona.

What was the error Sonja confirmed? What about the sentence "ilo moku li lili ala lili." translated as "Is the spoon small?" shouldn't that mean "Does the spoon reduces (something)?"? Was that another error? So we put "tan" here, it is a verb, but it retains the structure of a preposition (prep + noun) instead of having one of a verb (verb + e + noun)? If that is the case I guess you call it a verb in respect to its position but is it a preposition in respect to its meaning and the way the words following it relate to it (tan ma Tosi = from Germany). I'd say "verb" in this context is just a title indicating the position of the word, not related at all to its meaning. In the way I speak toki pona (I'm not a pu-taso user, unlike Tepan), "mi tan ala tan e nasin toki ni?" is a correct application of "tan" as a verb. It means "Did I give origin to that way of speaking?"

Some words can be of different types in the same sentence "jan li moku" means "people eat" and "people are food" and in "mi pana e sitelen tawa sina" "tawa" can be an adjective or a preposition. The problem with prepositions is that they have a unique construction form and other words can't become prepositions. So why should I abandon their usual reading just because they were dislodged to the beginning of a sentence in favor of a confuse structure with a complex noun phrase? That's strange for me, using a word the same way it is used normally is not.

In "mi moku e moku." the second moku is a noun, because its position (after 'e') obliges it to become something else. "la", on the other side, doesn't oblige any word to become anything. There isn't any guide like "noun ... + la" in the Book. We read verbs and adjectives as nouns in that position because we can't make sense of them in English without making this transformation. English has no "la" (does any language besides toki pona have?). But we can make sense of prepositions in that position in our native languages. It's just another way of ordering the sentence. It can be used to apply a preposition to various verb phrases instead of repeating it every time, it can serve for rhyming and metric. It's another option, just as "X la" is another way of saying "lon X". If it was the case that this is complex, I'm sure Sonja wouldn't confirm she uses prepositions before "la". If it was the case that "less is more" should apply here, then even "X la" = "lon X" could be deprecated, because it is just superfluous. Why learning two options when we have only one after all? Leave "la" for conditionals only!

Other lessons may be clearer in some points, but do they really strictly follow the Book? I don't and you admittedly don't either. Besides divergent terminology, you also use structures of the type "mi/sina(/o?) X li Y" meaning "I X and Y" while Sonja uses "mi X. mi Y." You use "poka" as a preposition meaning "with" (different from "at the side of", "near" = "lon poka pi"). Enjoy freedom! When I was trying to speak nasty long complex sentences I heard your advice. But moderately, we can have some freedom with toki pona. Should we forget Pije's lessons because he speaks differently sometimes? Even 76 Lessons agree in some un-pu usages. So are Kipo's lessons. Every toki pona teacher has divergences on some points. but if it's still good and simple why prohibit anything from those sources?

At last I want to ask you this: what is a preposition? A preposition can't be a noun, but can a noun (tan seme la sina pali?) be a preposition? A preposition can't be a verb, but can a verb be a preposition (sina tan ala tan ma Tosi?)? I also agree with Sonja: when asked if she uses prepositions before "la" she answered yes.

jan_Lope
Posts: 187
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 1:30 pm
Location: mi lon ma tomo Pelin.
Contact:

Re: la phrases

Postby jan_Lope » Fri Sep 01, 2017 2:39 am

jan Alanto o, toki!

Sonja confirmed me the translation error of "ona li mama ala mama?". As I wrote in my lessons yes/no-questions with "ala" doesn't work with the "missing be", because you can't write "ona li ' ala ' mama?" for example. But this is not the topic to talk about translation errors in pu.

jan Alanto wrote:The problem with prepositions is that they have a unique construction form and other words can't become prepositions.

I agree with you. And prepostition have special places in a sentence. This place is the beginnng of a prepositional object in a verb phrase at the end of a sentence.

The starting point of this topic was the following sentence of jan TepanNetaPelin:

"sama sina la mi pu."

For me "sama" is a noun here (see above). jan TepanNetaPelin wrote it is a preposition. But why he doesn't wrote it in this clear way:

"mi pu, sama sina."

But jan TepanNetaPelin "requested" an additional slot for a preposition in the first position of a "la" phrase. With an aditional slot you will get more possible grammar variants and the grammar becomes more complicated. You need an exemption clause for "lon" also (pu page 53).

Your proposal is to add a new level of (not clear formulated) rules. The result is even more complex grammar rules.

But as I understand you will not restricted the first slot in a "la" phrase to a word type. The funny thing is in pu "sama" is listed as adjective first. I think you need an additional rule for using the second place here. And grammar is becoming more and more complex ...

But there is absolutely no need for these entangled entities:

"mi pu, sama sina."


"Simplify your thoughts. Less is more." (pu page 9).
pona!
jan Lope
https://jan-lope.github.io
(Lessons and the Toki Pona Parser - A tool for spelling, grammar check and ambiguity check of Toki Pona)

On my foe list are the sockpuppets janKipo and janSilipu because of permanent, rude spamming.


Return to “kama sona toki”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest