From bpfk-list+bncCMHEmaCOBhCK9N7lBBoEBetNvg@googlegroups.com Thu Oct 14 19:19:08 2010 Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1P6Zst-0008EJ-0z; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 19:19:08 -0700 Received: by gyh3 with SMTP id 3sf338618gyh.16 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 19:18:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=zQg7SJ8c4mmSQIHdHD+vY/v1DgXJrY/fK4pe/XcbKd4=; b=2Ka1GcqTe/UEKyOR6in0n9cNBWQ1DkNMNyKWb4oa90MEditWbNsj6M+aANhPm+h0J3 /L4O59IPwBLDoWUKuVXbgopKpZJm0Nd7F4Q6CPR7o94mwiqgw2d/YW5B4rY14dwOydhl UREwSFq3mNyR3SQ4cvh0zyyzOr71nUeKr5ng8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=7CENprSMhDwAgiCY9xkDX+Qh0XI8kOGKnS3J7h645sGNWgj2yV0cTDQkwGAOrRC8V1 LJnToV3GPnMnSe1rcxas97sazrD2EBCTYeKTAcUGvHxalFqONQzqJ9ZUGAjwgLzsVP+h t8V5+NSS9wpUqk5IGKTJuxAeAnVw2EEjF9tRc= Received: by 10.150.68.41 with SMTP id q41mr1029907yba.45.1287109130656; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 19:18:50 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.55.74 with SMTP id t10ls2005547ibg.3.p; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 19:18:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.161.81 with SMTP id q17mr46425ibx.12.1287109130357; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 19:18:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.161.81 with SMTP id q17mr46424ibx.12.1287109130321; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 19:18:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f175.google.com (mail-iw0-f175.google.com [209.85.214.175]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id bm7si7198252ibb.2.2010.10.14.19.18.49; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 19:18:49 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.175; Received: by iwn2 with SMTP id 2so437774iwn.34 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 19:18:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.176.71 with SMTP id bd7mr48003icb.10.1287109124844; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 19:18:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.206.68 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 19:18:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20101014221058.GC15812@digitalkingdom.org> Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:18:44 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [bpfk] BPFK work - getting it done. From: Jonathan Jones To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba6e8a4c2c6bca04929e7275 --90e6ba6e8a4c2c6bca04929e7275 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2010/10/14 Jorge Llamb=EDas > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Jonathan Jones > wrote: > > 2010/10/14 Jorge Llamb=EDas > >> > >> And in any case, the "Durational (progressive/continuous) Aspects in > >> Future" is "I will be going" as in "I will be singing". Don't confuse > >> "I will be going (home)", with "I will be going to (sing)", where > >> "go" is used as an auxiliary. > > > > Yes. I know. I'm a native English speaker. I know the difference betwee= n > "I > > will be going home" and "I will be going to sing". > > Of course you know how to use them!. But that has nothing to do with > knowing the terminology to describe them. "Future > progressive/continuous" refers to "I will be singing", not to "I will > be going to sing". You read "I will be going" in the table and mistook > it for "I will be going to". Whoever wrote that table made a bad > mistake in choosing "go" as their example verb. Pointlessly confusing. > Ah. you're right. I hadn't noticed. None of the entries are "I will be goin= g to go", so I must've picked that one as being the most similar. > > If you look at the chart > > on the linked page, you'll see that /all/ of the entries have the word > > "aspects" in them. > > Yes, in English (as in many other Indoeuropean languages) tense and > aspect are intimately intertwined, but in Lojban they are clearly > separated. > > > And obviously {baba} has nothing to do with a > > destination. It is the stupidity of the English language using "will be > > going to" that's the problem here. > > "Future progressive/continuous" for "will be going to" is simply > wrong. You just misread the wikipedia table, it doesn't say that. > > > From the cmavo list at > > http://www.lojban.org/publications/wordlists/cmavo_selmaho_order.txt: > >> > >> baba - PU* - will be going to - time tense: will be going to; > >> (tense/modal) > > > > Personally, I'm in agreement with you. But I'm working on describing th= e > > unfinished cmavo entries in the BPFK sections, this is one of the > entries, > > and that's it's official definition, stupid as it is. > > There is a "to" in that definition. There is no "to" in the wikipedia > table. > "Future continuous" is "ba (future) ca'o (continuous)" there is no way > it can be "ba ba". > > "ba ba" is future in the future, and "will be going to" is a > reasonable approximation, even though it is pointless to have it as a > special definition. But it is not called what you are calling it. > > > I would like to at this time seek approval for removing the following > > entries from the BPFK Section: Tense page: > > > > {baba}=B9 > > {bapu}=B9 > > {puba}=B9 > > {pupu}=B9 > > > > {baca'a}=B2 > > {caca'a}=B2 > > {cajeba}=B2 > > {puca'a}=B2 > > {pujeba}=B2 > > {pujeca}=B2 > > {puza}=B2 > > {puze'a}=B2 > > {puze'i}=B2 > > {puze'u}=B2 > > {puzi}=B2 > > {puzu}=B2 > > > > =B9 Official meaning differs from usage, as well as being non-intuitive= . > > =B2 Meaning is obvious given meaning of components and therefore does n= ot > need > > it's own entry. > > I fully support their removal. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > So, all I need is Robin and/or And to agree, and there's a majority. .u'izo'o --=20 mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.a'o.e'e ko cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu d= o zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den. --90e6ba6e8a4c2c6bca04929e7275 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2010/10/14 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com&= gt;
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/10/14 Jorge Llamb=EDas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
>>
>> And in any case, the "Durational (pro= gressive/continuous) Aspects in
>> Future" is "I will be going" as in "I will be = singing". Don't confuse
>> "I will be going (home)", =A0with "I will be going = to (sing)", where
>> "go" is used as an auxiliary.
>
> Yes. I know. I'm a native English speaker. I know the difference b= etween "I
> will be going home" and "I will be going to sing".

Of course you know how to use them!. But that has nothing to do with<= br> knowing the terminology to describe them. "Future
progressive/continuous" refers to "I will be singing", not t= o "I will
be going to sing". You read "I will be going" in the table a= nd mistook
it for "I will be going to". Whoever wrote that table made a bad<= br> mistake in choosing "go" as their example verb. Pointlessly confu= sing.

Ah. you're right. I hadn't noticed. = None of the entries are "I will be going to go", so I must've= picked that one as being the most similar.
=A0
> If you look at the chart
> on the linked page, you'll see that /all/ of the entries have the = word
> "aspects" in them.

Yes, in English (as in many other Indoeuropean languages) tense and aspect are intimately intertwined, but in Lojban they are clearly
separated.

> And obviously {baba} has nothing to do with a
> destination. It is the stupidity of the English language using "w= ill be
> going to" that's the problem here.

"Future progressive/continuous" for "will be going to&= quot; is simply
wrong. You just misread the wikipedia table, it doesn't say that.

> From the cmavo list at
> http://www.lojban.org/publications/wordlists/c= mavo_selmaho_order.txt:
>>
>> baba - PU* - will be going to - time tense: will be going to;
>> (tense/modal)
>
> Personally, I'm in agreement with you. But I'm working on desc= ribing the
> unfinished cmavo entries in the BPFK sections, this is one of the entr= ies,
> and that's it's official definition, stupid as it is.

There is a "to" in that definition. There is no "to&qu= ot; in the wikipedia table.
"Future continuous" is "ba (future) ca'o (continuous)&qu= ot; there is no way
it can be "ba ba".

"ba ba" is future in the future, and "will be going to"= is a
reasonable approximation, even though it is pointless to have it as a
special definition. But it is not called what you are calling it.

> I would like to at this time seek approval for removing the following<= br> > entries from the BPFK Section: Tense page:
>
> {baba}=B9
> {bapu}=B9
> {puba}=B9
> {pupu}=B9
>
> {baca'a}=B2
> {caca'a}=B2
> {cajeba}=B2
> {puca'a}=B2
> {pujeba}=B2
> {pujeca}=B2
> {puza}=B2
> {puze'a}=B2
> {puze'i}=B2
> {puze'u}=B2
> {puzi}=B2
> {puzu}=B2
>
> =B9 Official meaning differs from usage, as well as being non-intuitiv= e.
> =B2 Meaning is obvious given meaning of components and therefore does = not need
> it's own entry.

I fully support their removal.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

So, all I need is Robi= n and/or And to agree, and there's a majority. .u'izo'o

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.a'o.e'e k= o cmima le bende pe lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den.
--90e6ba6e8a4c2c6bca04929e7275--