Appendix A. Unsettled Business
184
reflexive’s job (refer to something in the main bridi of the sentence), ri usually will not work, because
you will have mentioned other sumti in between. This leaves you stuck with ra, which is deliberately as
vague as natural language pronouns. “But,” reasons the average Lojbanist, “if I wanted natural
language vagueness, I’d be speaking a natural language. And because I will need to refer back to sumti
of the main sentence often (main and embedded bridi tend to involve the same cast of characters), I’d
rather vo’a serve as an unambiguous way of doing just that.”
So whether because it was what they got used to in 1991 (and they didn’t want to relearn the language
in 1997), or because they thought vo’a would be more useful that way, Lojbanists interpret la kris. djuno
ledu’u la pat. prami vo’a as saying that Chris knows that Pat loves her, not herself. So Lojbanists use vo’a
as a long-distance reflexive.
... almost always. There are two occasions when you will occasionally see short-distance
interpretations instead. The first is when the long-distance interpretation doesn’t make sense for some
reason. For example, the x
1
place of the main bridi contains the embedded bridi containing vo’a—so a
long-distance reading would get terribly recursive: lenu la suzyn. jmina fi le vo’a ctebi cinta cu cinri
makes sense as “Susan putting on her lipstick is interesting”, but not as the horridly recursive “Susan
putting on x’s lipstick is interesting”—where x is “Susan putting on x’s lipstick”, where x is “Susan
putting on x’s lipstick”, where x is “Susan putting on x’s lipstick”...)
The second occasion is (you guessed it) soivo’a. People are used to thinking of soivo’a as vice versa,
which forces a short-distance interpretation. And while there are reasons you would want vo’a in
general to be a long-distance reflexive, there isn’t much occasion for a long-distance reciprocal.
If usage to date were the only thing that determined the meaning of Lojban words (as is usually
believed by the community), we might say that vo’a is by default long-distance, but becomes short-
distance under special circumstances (such as soivo’a.) But past usage is not the only factor in
determining what Lojban words mean. Lojbanists cherish their precious few unambiguous pro-sumti,
and most would rather not lose one. So, while some Lojbanists have said (and will likely continue to
say) things like la kris. djuno ledu’u la pat. prami la djun. soi vo’a, meaning that Pat and June love each
other, most Lojbanists think they are being wrong, and would prefer something like la kris. djuno ledu’u
la pat. prami la djun. soi ri.
Note: Thephrasela djun. soi ricountsasonesumti,sothankfullyriheredoesnotrefertoJune!
Incidentally, there are truly unambiguous alternatives to vo’a, if you’re not comfortable with the way
this is heading. We won’t explain them here, but you might be able to guess how they work anyway.
The guaranteed short-distance reflexive in Lojban is lenei, and the guaranteed long-distance reflexive is
leno’axiro. (leno’a is enough when there is only one level of bridi nesting.) In the unlikely case your use
of vo’a is met with blank, uncomprehending stares, you can try using these instead.
Unfilled places in ka-abstractions
When there is no ce’u in the abstraction, there is some controversy as to how the ka-abstraction is to be
interpreted. In many instances, the existence of a slot to be filled by ce’u is required by the definition of
the bridi itself. For example, sisku leka pensi makes no sense, unless you are looking for a specific
something that fits a ce’u slot in pensi.
For such instances, the location of ce’u is ambiguous, and The Complete Lojban Language mentions no
convention having arisen, like with ke’a, on where it goes by default. The current default assumption is