Broadly speaking it's used to form infinitives. mi'e la tsani mu'o On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 07:27:52AM -0600, MorphemeAddict wrote: > What is the sense of "ka" that is used in modern dialects of Lojban? I > didn't even realize Lojban has dialects. > > stevo > > On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 11:39 AM Jacob Thomas Errington < > jake@mail.jerrington.me> wrote: > > > Why even bother with {tu'a}? What's hiding under that implicit abstraction > > anyway? > > > > One could just say {mi nelci lo ka xunre}. Even though modern dialects > > of Lojban use {ka} in a particular way (mostly unrelated to the > > presentation of {ka} in the CLL), {mi nelci lo ka xunre} could make > > sense. > > I would interpret it to mean something like "I like to-be-red" and I > > use dashes here to distance this interpretation from what the English > > "I like to be red" means. The Lojban would mean something like "I like > > it that things are red" or that "I like redness". This is in contrast > > with {lo ka xunre cu pluka mi} which would actually mean "I like to be > > red". > > > > mi'e la tsani mu'o > > > > On Wed, Feb 05, 2020 at 11:33:25AM -0500, Michael Turniansky wrote: > > > I mean, I'm reading emails from 3.5 years ago, and Lord knows i don't > > > grok modern dialects of lojban, but. What's wrong with "mi nelci (tu'a) > > lo > > > ka xunre"? isn't the whole point of ka to be a quale extractor? > > > --gejyspa > > > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 5:06 AM Gleki Arxokuna < > > gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2016-05-12 11:43 GMT+03:00 Curtis Franks <curtis.w.franks@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > >> Throughout this response, I use "qualia" rather than "quale" at some > > > >> points because there may be more than one quale associated with that > > thing, > > > >> I do not want to assume. > > > >> > > > >> > "Is that very different from "I like elephants", "elephants are > > > >> beautiful animals"?" > > > >> > > > >> Yes, at least from a technical standpoint in Lojban. In Lojban "lo > > xunre" > > > >> is a red thing. So, we can only say "I like red things" and "red > > things are > > > >> beautiful things". To actually capture the essence of redness, we > > need a > > > >> new mechanism. We could also use it in order to capture the qualia of > > > >> elephantness, but that is only sort of what you probably like or find > > > >> beautiful. There is an added layer of abstraction or > > instant-experience > > > >> there. Red (the color) is a sensation, independent of what is causing > > it > > > >> (the stimulus). The essence/being of an elephant is similar, but not > > really > > > >> a sensation that I, at least, directly register normally. However, if > > you > > > >> had never seen an elephant and I described everything about them to > > you, > > > >> and then you eventually experienced one in real life, any new > > information > > > >> that you gained from the experience would presumably be the qualia of > > > >> elephantness and that is something which you would have a firmer > > grasp on > > > >> and might like. I would not say, though, that most people are > > thinking this > > > >> way when saying that they like elephants, although maybe they could or > > > >> should (or should could). > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > "Is that very different from "I see elephants" when there are no > > > >> elephants around?" > > > >> > > > >> Again, a little bit. Seeing red is a direct sensation. There is no > > object > > > >> involved and no processing/deeper understanding. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is still some object that is red. How can you sense red without > > an > > > > object? > > > > > > > > A red apple is on a red table together with a red knife and there is > > the > > > > red sun that you can see through the red window. All of them together > > > > (table+apple+knife+window+the sun) can be called "one single red thing > > (or > > > > grand-thing if you wish)". > > > > > > > > All of the red things you have ever experiences in your life can be > > called > > > > "one single red thing" (so that's why "set of all things" in gua\spi > > > > definition although "set" needs more precise definition here, > > obviously, > > > > the same apple seen two times are two experiences and therefore two > > > > mini-things that are parts of one grand-thing). > > > > > > > > > > > > Seeing an elephant is seeing an object which is an elephant and > > > >> interpreting it as such (even if that object does not exist, there is > > no > > > >> way of knowing that by instanteous vision alone). Of course, there > > are some > > > >> qualia to it, but there is also, in the normal interpretation of that > > > >> statement, something more. It is not impossible to see the qualia of > > > >> elephantness, but that is not what you really mean, I think. > > > >> > > > > > > > > So what is meant here? > > > > I've seen several pictures of elephants in books and now I sense a real > > > > elephant. It has the same set of properties as those elephants have > > > > (pictures of whom I read earlier.) > > > > I've seen that red apple, that red knife and now I can see a red ball. > > > > Earlier experiences had red being 640 nm and 660 nm wavelength > > together (a > > > > mixture of two properties, both wavelengths are expressed with "red"). > > > > This red ball is 640 nm only (+ many other properties like roundness > > etc.) > > > > I've never seen red balls before but this one matches my earlier > > > > experiences so I call it "red". This red ball also has this property > > of 640 > > > > nm as the aopple and the knife. > > > > > > > > This elephant also has this property of "has trunk + gray + four legs + > > > > ears" just as those elephants pictured in those books I read earlier. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > "So "I like elephants" becomes "mi nelci lo ganseti be lo ka > > xanto"?" > > > >> > > > >> No. That is "I like the qualia of elephantness". Liking the object of > > an > > > >> or several elephant(s) is just "mi nelci lo xanto". An elephant is one > > > >> object which has the qualia of elephantness (and, arguably, might be > > the > > > >> unique class with this property). Analogously, "mi nelci lo xunre" is > > "I > > > >> like one or several objects which are red". These objects are things > > which > > > >> have the quale of redness (possibly and even probably/arguably > > necessarily > > > >> among other qualia). To like redness itself, the very idea and > > essence and > > > >> immediate sensation of it, one needs the qualia abstraction. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > "I don't see a problem with a word for "qualia", but I don't expect > > > >> people to start saying "I like the qualia of being red" or "I like the > > > >> qualia of being an elephant" instead of "I like red" or "I like > > elephants" > > > >> though. It seems more natural that "lo xanto", "lo xunre" can be > > elephants > > > >> (in general) and red as well as particular elephants or particular red > > > >> objects. I'd rather these ontological distinctions be handled with > > brivla, > > > >> not grammaticized with cmavo." > > > >> > > > >> It is a matter of what people should say, not what they currently do > > say > > > >> due to bad habits and the failings of natural languages and their own > > > >> education and tendencies in using Lojban. If they are alerted to such > > > >> issues, then they are more likely to improve. As they currently are, > > and if > > > >> they ignore these issues, they are incorrect. Lojban is, in my > > opinion, > > > >> meant to bring this realization to the surface and then to fix it and > > to > > > >> provide the tools for doing so in a reasonable but uncompromisingly > > > >> rigorous way. Natural usage has nothing to do with it because it is > > wrong > > > >> in this case. > > > >> > > > >> I think that a cmavo is extremely beneficial and probably necessary in > > > >> this case. In general, we may try to avoid staking out ontological > > > >> positions via their establishment. > > > >> > > > >> Note that this is not just a philosophical position that is being > > > >> hardcoded into the language's vocabulary, functionality/support, and > > > >> grammar. There is already a major flaw in the language that must be > > patched > > > >> somehow. This is one solution, and a versatile and robust one at > > that. And, > > > >> like I said, it is good to bring awareness to the language's learners > > about > > > >> this issue in their own conscious understanding of their cognition. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the only flaw here is to be still with morphology of English > > with > > > > its adjective/noun distinction. > > > > E.g. Russian language uses colors as verbs so what? Shall we borrow > > this > > > > thing into Lojban? > > > > > > > > The only lack of precision I can see in red/elephant distinction is > > that > > > > elephants are more stable in time but this is a vague distinction as > > people > > > > mentioned many times (e.g. [1] > > > > < > > https://mw.lojban.org/papri/Tl%C3%B6n,_Uqbar_and_la_gleki's_fishy_apples> > > > > ). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups > > > >> "lojban" group. > > > >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > > send an > > > >> email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > > >> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > > > >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. > > > >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups > > > > "lojban" group. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > > an > > > > email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > > > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > > > > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban. > > > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "lojban" group. > > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > > an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/CAKOEKkT2d61OWw0orJN9PCE135cqL3ZB_Bno5ZjwfOn7JH7apQ%40mail.gmail.com > > . > > > > -- > > Jacob Thomas Errington > > W: https://jerrington.me/ > > > > > > Sent via Migadu.com, world's easiest email hosting > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "lojban" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > > email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/20200205173834.u7jlfnisrqsbqeix%40renro > > . > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/CAHiXx%3DP3La9UiyhELbMEU4xjYreU3DTsCxnKPAuX%3DrLqGNe3YA%40mail.gmail.com. -- Jacob Thomas Errington W: https://jerrington.me/ Sent via Migadu.com, world's easiest email hosting -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/20200207042943.x7d4cv6znyloxpql%40renro.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature