Chapter 11. Relative Clauses & Possession#

What Is a Relative Clause?#

A relative clause is a mini-bridi attached to a sumti that says more about it. In English: "the dog that bit me", "the store I went to", "the person who is singing".

What are you pointing at?#

ti, ta, and tu only say how far away something is — not what part of the thing you mean. Point at someone’s face and say:

ti cu barda This is big.

Is ti the whole person, the nose, or a tiny patch of skin? Relative clauses exist so you can narrow the referent with a full mini-bridi:

ti poi ke'a prenu cu barda This [thing], which is a person, is big.

ti poi ke'a nazbi cu barda This [thing], which is a nose, is big.

ti poi ke'a nazbi bo kapkevna cu barda These [things], which are nose-pores, are big. (kapkevna ≈ skin-hole / pore; bo groups the tanru clearly.)

Same pointing gesture — three different poi clauses, three different meanings. The rest of this chapter explains how to build and combine these clauses; pe / po / po'e shortcuts come a bit later.

---

In Lojban, relative clauses attach to sumti using two particles:

poi

restrictive relative clause — narrows down which referent is meant

noi

incidental relative clause — adds parenthetical information about an already-identified referent

The relative clause is closed by the elidable terminator ku'o. Inside the clause, ke'a stands for the sumti the clause is attached to.

---

poi: Restrictive Relative Clauses#

poi introduces a clause that restricts the referent — you need it to know which thing is meant:

le gerku poi blabi cu barda The dog that is white is big.

Without "that is white", you wouldn't know which dog. The poi clause is essential to identification.

ke'a marks the relativized sumti's position inside the clause:

ti poi ke'a prenu cu barda This thing such that it is a person is big. → This person is big.

When ke'a falls in x₁, it can be omitted (the default):

le gerku poi blabi cu barda = le gerku poi ke'a blabi cu barda The dog that is-white is big.

ke'a can fill any slot in the clause:

tu poi le mlatu pu lacpu ke'a cu ratcu That thing which the cat dragged is a rat.

Here ke'a is in x₂ of lacpu (the dragged object), not x₁.

---

noi: Incidental Relative Clauses#

noi adds parenthetical information. The referent is already identified; the clause just elaborates:

le gerku noi blabi cu barda The dog, which is white, is big.

The comma-equivalent is the key difference from poi. In noi, the clause doesn't change which dog — you already know. It just adds "and by the way, it's white."

mi noi pajni cu zvati I, a judge, am present. (who I am is already known; "judge" is extra info)

le mi karce noi blabi cu spofu My car, which is white, is broken. (I have one car; its whiteness is incidental)

vs.

le mi karce poi blabi cu spofu My car that is white is broken. (I have multiple cars; we need "white" to pick the right one)

The distinction maps onto English punctuation: poi = no commas (restrictive), noi = with commas (incidental).

Restrictive clause vs. tanru: Often you can fold the property into the selbri instead of using poi:

xu do viska le mi blabi karce Do you see my white car?

That is close in spirit to le mi karce poi blabi, but a tanru like blabi karce can be vague (white things about the car, carriers of white things, etc.). A poi clause can only mean “the car is white” in the sense of the bridi inside poi. For precise identification, prefer poi when it matters.

---

Multiple Relative Clauses: zi'e#

To attach more than one relative clause to the same sumti, join them with zi'e:

le gerku poi blabi zi'e poi batci le nanmu cu klama The dog that is white and that bites the man goes.

le gerku poi blabi zi'e noi le mi pendo cu ponse cu batci The dog that is white, which my friend owns, bites [someone].

You can mix poi and noi with zi'e.

---

Possession: pe, po, po'e, po'u#

Rather than a full relative clause, Lojban has relative phrase shortcuts using GOI cmavo. These are a single particle followed by one sumti:

pe — loose association ("associated with")

Like saying "of" or "belonging to" in a general, contextual sense.

le stizu pe mi cu blanu The chair of mine is blue. (the one I'm currently sitting on, or loosely associated with)

po — specific possession (alienable)

A more permanent connection, typically ownership.

le stizu po mi cu xunre My chair is red. (the one I own)

po'e — intrinsic/inalienable possession

Cannot be separated from the possessor without changing them.

le birka po'e mi cu spofu My arm is broken. (it's intrinsically mine — body part)

po'u — identity

This isn't possession but identification: "which is [the same thing as]".

le gerku po'u le mi pendo cu cinba mi The dog, which is my friend, kisses me. (dog = my friend, same entity)

le tcadu po'u la .nu,IORK. cu barda The city which is New York is big. (disambiguates which city)

ne — incidental loose association (like noi version of pe)

le blabi gerku ne mi cu batci do The white dog, which is mine, bites you.

no'u — incidental identity

le nanmu no'u la .djim. cu terpemci The man, Jim, is a poet.

A GOI phrase is one sumti after the marker; the phrase ends with an elidable ge'u (almost always dropped) if something else follows that could be confused with more of the phrase.

---

Phrase or full clause? (GOI and poi)#

Many GOI phrases say the same thing as a longer poi clause — the phrase is just shorter when the relation is a simple “about / associated with”:

le stizu pe mi cu blanu My chair is blue (loose association).

le stizu poi ke'a srana mi cu blanu The chair that pertains to me is blue. — same idea, with srana (x₁ pertains to x₂).

po is stronger than pe (“specifically associated” — often possession): le stizu po mi ≈ le stizu poi ke'a se steci srana mi in spirit. You do not need to memorize the long form; use it when you are unsure what pe vs po implies.

---

Possession vs. Place Structures#

Many gismu already have an "owner" or "body" place built in. For body parts, you can use the place structure directly:

le birka be mi cu spofu = le birka po'e mi cu spofu My arm is broken. (birka x₂ = the body it belongs to)

When the gismu has the right slot, this is more concise than using po'e. But po'e is more general — it works even when there's no dedicated place.

---

be: Filling Inner Places of a Description Selbri#

When you build a description with le, you can fill the selbri's non-x₁ places inside the description using be … bei … be'o:

be

fills x₂ of the selbri

bei

fills x₃, x₄, etc.

be'o

closes the be construction

le dunda be le rozgu bei mi The giver of the rose to me (dunda: x₁ gives x₂ to x₃; be=x₂=le rozgu, bei=x₃=mi)

le klama be la bastn. bei la .atlantas. The goer to Boston from Atlanta

This is how you build rich, place-filled descriptions without breaking them into separate sentences.

le birka be mi = the arm of my body (using be to fill x₂ of birka)

Why does be/bei/be'o exist?#

This is a grammar-motivated question. Without be, the parser faces an ambiguity whenever a sumti follows the selbri inside a description:

le mamta mi — is mi filling x₂ of mamta (= my mother)? Or is it a second sumti in the outer bridi?

The answer from the grammar: a bare sumti after a selbri inside a le description is not interpreted as filling the selbri's inner places. It is parsed as another sumti of the outer bridi.

be is the explicit signal that says "this sumti belongs inside the description, filling a numbered place of the selbri":

le mamta be mi = unambiguously "the mother of me" le mamta mi = ambiguous / likely parsed as two separate sumti

The chain continues with bei for each additional inner place:

le dunda be le rozgu bei mi bei la .paris. The giver of the rose to me in Paris (dunda: x₁=giver x₂=thing given x₃=recipient x₄=origin)

be'o closes the chain. It is needed when a relative clause or another structural word immediately follows — without it, the parser might try to absorb the relative clause into the be chain:

le dunda be le rozgu bei mi be'o poi melbi cu zvati The giver of the rose to me who is beautiful is here. (be'o explicitly ends the inner-place filling before poi)

In practice be'o is often omitted when ku or the end of the description makes the boundary clear, but it is required to avoid ambiguity with relative clauses.

---

Relative Clauses in Descriptions with be#

You can combine be and relative clauses:

le gerku poi blabi be mi The dog that is white (that belongs to me)

or:

le gerku be mi poi blabi My dog that is white (be mi = x₂ of gerku = my body? No — gerku x₂ is breed, not owner)

The interaction of be and relative clauses requires care: be fills a numbered place, while relative clauses are adjuncts. They combine freely.

---

voi: The Speaker-Restrictive Clause#

voi is a variant of poi that creates a "speaker-asserted" restrictive clause, parallel to the le vs lo distinction:

lo prenu poi klama — a person who comes (really is a going-person)

lo prenu voi klama — a person who I call a going-person (speaker's description)

voi is less common but worth knowing.

---

vu'o: Relative Clauses Across Complex Sumti#

Normally, a relative clause attaches only to the immediately preceding sumti. But what if your sumti is complex — already carrying a pe phrase or a be chain? vu'o extends the attachment point to span the entire sumti:

le gerku pe mi poi blabi cu barda The dog of mine that is white is big. (poi attaches to "le gerku pe mi" as a whole)

Without vu'o, a relative clause in an ambiguous position might attach to just the innermost piece. With vu'o, you make explicit that the clause modifies the entire complex:

le gerku pe mi vu'o poi blabi cu barda My dog, [as a whole,] which is white, is big.

vu'o is the signal: "the relative clause that follows attaches to everything from the start of this description, not just the last word."

This becomes important with longer chains:

le dunda be le rozgu bei mi vu'o poi melbi cu klama The giver of the rose to me, who is beautiful, comes. (poi melbi modifies the whole description "giver of the rose to me", not just mi)

---

Relative Clauses in Vocative Phrases#

When addressing someone with a vocative, you can add a relative clause to describe which person you're calling:

coi ro do poi klama le zarci Hello, all of you who are going to the store!

doi la .djan. poi melbi Hey John who is beautiful! (or: Hey, you beautiful John)

pe'u do poi ponse le karce [Please,] you who own the car.

The relative clause after a vocative works like any other — it restricts (poi) or adds information (noi) about the person being addressed.

Relative Clause Position Effects#

Where you place a relative clause relative to a description can subtly change the meaning:

After a le description — restricts which individuals are meant (most common):

le gerku poi blabi cu barda The dog(s) that are white are big. (poi restricts: only the white dogs)

After a bare lo description — the clause becomes part of the description itself, defining what kind of thing counts:

lo gerku poi blabi cu barda Something that is a white dog is big. (the clause and the selbri together define the type)

Inside a description (before the selbri, after the descriptor) — the clause applies to the entire description-group quantifier, not just the final member:

le poi blabi ku gerku cu barda (Grammatically unusual; normally the clause follows the full noun phrase.)

The safest rule: relative clauses follow their entire sumti. Use vu'o to disambiguate when the sumti is complex.

---

Nested Relative Clauses and ke'a Subscripts#

When a relative clause appears inside another relative clause, both use ke'a as the relativized pronoun — but they refer to different sumti. Without disambiguation, this is ambiguous:

le prenu poi prami le gerku poi batci ke'a

Which ke'a — the person or the dog? To disambiguate, subscript ke'a with xi:

le prenu poi ke'a xi pa prami le gerku poi batci ke'a xi re The person₁ who loves the dog₂ that bites [the person₁]

ke'a xi pa refers to the outer relative clause's antecedent (the person); ke'a xi re refers to the inner clause's antecedent (the dog). Alternatively, assign one of the sumti to a ko'a slot before introducing the clause:

le prenu goi ko'a poi prami le gerku poi batci ko'a The person [= ko'a] who loves the dog that bites ko'a

The ko'a approach is clearer in most practical writing.

---

Relative Clause Terminators: ku'o vs vau#

Both ku'o and vau can close a poi/noi/voi relative clause:

• ku'o — the dedicated NOI terminator; closes only relative clauses.
• vau — the general bridi terminator; also valid here and one syllable shorter.

In most cases, both are elidable at the end of the relative clause (before the main bridi's selbri or before .i). The case where a terminator must be kept is when the relative clause is followed immediately by another relative clause without zi'e:

le gerku poi blabi ku'o noi barda cu klama The dog, which is white and which (by the way) is big, comes.

Without ku'o, the parser might try to attach noi barda to the wrong level. Using zi'e to join them is usually cleaner:

le gerku poi blabi zi'e noi barda cu klama

---

Summary#