jarco is broken, it's just a question of how. Either:
- jarco means "x1 showes itself to have property x2", which is of limited utility and contradicted by its notes, OR
- jarco means "x1 shows something unspecifiable to have property x2", which is just plain broken
Both Bob and John believe that the second option is true, and that the problem is that jarco uses the old (pre-du'u) definition of ka. This is borne out by the following phrase in the notes: (simple presence could be expressed by leka object cu zvati), which is totally illegal under the current ka.
I'm not sure how to fix this. I think the right thing is to put a "thing having property" place between the x2 and x3. Fixes the problem, doesn't screw usage too badly (I doubt anyone much used the x3), and doesn't put the thing far away from its property in the place structure) as making the thing the x4 would. I'm totally open to suggestions, though.
Bob notes that we need to look for other cases.
There are 163 gismu that contain "propert" or the word "ka". They are listed below. I would like someone else to check them, please. I do enough around here. You're looking for "ka" (or, equivalently, "property" places) for which the thing having the property is in any way unclear.
Of the 163 gismu listed, there are seven (cmima, gunma, lacpu, lenjo, minra, ratni, selci) that seem to be there by accident.
We can divide the remaining 156 in nine groups:
Group 1: x1 is XXX in property x2
(with eventual places such as by standard, under conditions, to observer, among members of set, etc.)
This is the biggest group with 45+10 cases. The 45 are: banli barda bebna carmi caxno cenba cimni ckaji cmalu cnici condi curve daplu denmi dikni drani fadni jdika kalsa kandi kantu makcu manfo milxe mulno mupli mutce pindi pluja prane ralci ricfu rirci ruble sampu simlu stodi traji tsal vipsi vitci vitno vrici zasni zenba. The other 10 are: gradu ranxi satci suksa, which have the property in x3 and a standard or similar in x2, cinmo ganse, which are somewhat odd, darsi tarti troci, which can take an event in x2 (makes more sense than a property), and girzu, whose place structure needs clarifying.
Group 2: x1 is XXX to x2 in (x1's) property x3
(a couple of them have by standard x4)
This group has 12+1 cases. The 12 are: cfipu cizra cnino fange mansa melbi slabu trina vajni xajmi zdile zunti. The other one is skicu, which has an additional agent place in front.
Group 3: x1 reacts XXX to x2 due to (x2's) property x3
This group has 4+1 cases: ckasu ckire fengu jilra, plus xrani in which x1 doesn't react to the property but rather affects it. (It is odd that xrani has this place structure but ckire doesn't, though.)
Group 4: x1 is XXX compared to x2 in property x3
This group has 16+3 cases: bancu darno dukti dunli frica jbini jibni jimte lamji mapti mleca panra ralju sarxe simsa zmadu, and the odd 3: karbi, which adds an agent in front, rimni, which has the property in x4, and talsa, which is somewhat strange and probably does not belong here.
Group 5: x1 is an XXX, characterized by x?
(usually with other intervening places)
This group has 22 cases: cedra cinse ciste citsi ckiku dinko fetsi jendu julne jurme klesi kruvi linsi nakni patxu pijne rafsi tansi tarci vidru xislu zbepi
Group 6: x1 (ka) is an XXX property of x2
This group has 10 cases: cfila cimde funca jinzi kampu ranji steci tcini tengu vrusi. It is not clear that all of these really need properties in x1.
Group 7: These contain a warning like this one in their definition: "x? may be a specific object, a commodity (mass), an event, or a property; pedantically, for objects/commodities, this is sumti-raising from ownership of the object/commodity". Some of them involve the transfer of this object/commodity and so presumably if it was a property it would apply to the old or to the new "owner".
This group has 16 cases: canja cirko cnemu dirba dunda friti jbera jdima jerna jinga kargu lebna pleji prali vamji vecnu
Group 8: In these, the property does not seem to apply to anything, and should probably be an event.
This group has 11 cases: bapli cmoni cumki jgira jicmu kajde kufra lakne pajni stika tsapi
Group 9: The remaining 5 cases:
ciksi x1 (person) explains x2 (event/state/property) to x3 with explanation x4 (du'u)
cipra x1 (process/event) is a test for/proof of property/state x2 in subject x3 (individ./set/mass)
cnano x1 value is a norm/average in property/amount x2 (ka/ni) among x3(s) (set) by standard x4
jarco x1 (agent) shows/exhibits/displays/reveals/demonstrates x2 (property) to audience x3
sisku x1 seeks/searches/looks for property x2 among set x3 (complete specification of set)
-- -- ---