Received: from localhost ([::1]:47151 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Tu5Xd-0001V0-V1; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 10:10:50 -0800 Received: from mail-ee0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:54892) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Tu5XW-0001Uu-5I for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 10:10:48 -0800 Received: by mail-ee0-f46.google.com with SMTP id e49so1321038eek.5 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 10:10:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=MKwsEZ8qHKEVOe9I0y2F67EC8NdixShD5YODTiTMN4k=; b=YmZp1+6GaNqxMKVJSjXQ0cUAZXVW26HJD2Wsm25pKsW9KLunKsxT1e1Mb4Fgtf+uXn C2TfpUicj2qQim4ogW8TIe4cgX6VOTss0lR/cONn4FLnHKFEiC59yIsi4EZlhzptRxeA zdXVYuY+Qu7zQSRZM9wvufPFnm6ZThulMESGWW1JixwZJfo6GE3J62evrQxbpo80hwFS Zrsb5CcqvvzQMGPAEIrOnoyc5BWMrzGgQgPnh1GgomU2+KEWv+Cd0/dpQjeMHKr0h5nu bno/4XWg5TVZ2oRlfBqWEM3DL1xSeQxPea/rt6qPhBXUUh7w2P7ZsX+YaqysEpsB+2ZM 5AEg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.209.131 with SMTP id s3mr5016371eeo.28.1358014234683; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 10:10:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.151.16 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Jan 2013 10:10:34 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <50F120AF.8040809@valint.net> References: <50F120AF.8040809@valint.net> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 13:10:34 -0500 Message-ID: From: Eitan Postavsky To: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: 0.2 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.2 X-Spam_score_int: 2 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:37 AM, Compu-Celebi wrote: > On 1/11/2013 4:55 PM, Eitan Postavsky wrote: > > 3) terserspaji: sp2 is surprised by step st3 while traversing stairs, > surprised either that it exists or that it doesn't exist; sp2 unexpectedly > hits floor when expecting to step on step st3; sp2 unexpectedly hits step > st3 when expecting to step on floor. > > Every *terserspaji* must be an unexpected stepping, not a surprised > stepper, because every *terserspaji* is a *spaji* and every *spaji* is a > surprising/startling/unexpected event/action, and *terserti* are neither > events/actions nor *spaji***. Therefore, regardless of whether the > arguments are mentioned in the order in which you intended their places to > be (which I cannot ascertain because "x1" and "x2" are excluded), your > place structure is flawed. > Ah, yes, must have had a bit of a brainfart. This lujvo is the one I spent the least time thinking about :S Thanks for your patience. [...] Content analysis details: (0.2 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (eitanp32[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (eitanp32[at]gmail.com) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature Subject: Re: [jbovlaste] Gride sound, tip of the tongue, and missing a step on a staircase X-BeenThere: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: jbovlaste@lojban.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4320800781494288923==" Errors-To: jbovlaste-bounces@lojban.org --===============4320800781494288923== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b603bce0ee92104d31b54d0 --047d7b603bce0ee92104d31b54d0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:37 AM, Compu-Celebi wrot= e: > On 1/11/2013 4:55 PM, Eitan Postavsky wrote: > > 3) terserspaji: sp2 is surprised by step st3 while traversing stairs, > surprised either that it exists or that it doesn't exist; sp2 unexpectedl= y > hits floor when expecting to step on step st3; sp2 unexpectedly hits step > st3 when expecting to step on floor. > > Every *terserspaji* must be an unexpected stepping, not a surprised > stepper, because every *terserspaji* is a *spaji* and every *spaji* is a > surprising/startling/unexpected event/action, and *terserti* are neither > events/actions nor *spaji***. Therefore, regardless of whether the > arguments are mentioned in the order in which you intended their places t= o > be (which I cannot ascertain because "x1" and "x2" are excluded), your > place structure is flawed. > Ah, yes, must have had a bit of a brainfart. This lujvo is the one I spent the least time thinking about :S Thanks for your patience. > > I propose this alternative (which includes the *serti*, also, as an > argument): > > x1=3Dsp1 is an event/action of x2=3Dsp2 unexpectedly stepping off > stairs/stairway/steps x3=3Dst2, instead of onto step x4=3Dst3, or onto st= ep > x3=3Dst4, instead of off stairs/stairway/steps x3=3Dst2 > You are right to include st1 (I believe you meant st1, not st2). That will probably be of more use than st3 when complaining to your friends about how a stupidly designed staircase made you stub your toe. I propose, then, that st3 be dropped, for, in the language of the CLL chapter Dog House and White House, st1 and st3 are mutually dependent places (it's almost always the topmost or bottommost step that gets you). However, I question the separation of sp1 from the rest of the bridi. What's the use of x1 in your proposed place structure? It just gets in the way. My idea was to have it be some sort of implicit-abstraction lujvo. But then you object that having an implicit-abstraction lujvo with the x1 of the tertau being the abstraction is confusing, rightly so, so perhaps this: serselspaji: sp2, traversing stairs/stairway/steps st1, gets startled by taking a step/stride and the ground not being at the expected level for the landing foot/terdzu, e.g. by expecting one more step to go when it has already finished the staircase. (I feel comfortable using "it" for agents when talking about place structures.) That /is/ the intended order of places, x1=3Dsp2 and x2=3Dst1. Interesting, a bit of {cadzu} is creeping in there... Yes, this is a torturedly-implicit abstraction indeed. But, since I've sent this word out there already, I'll just go right ahead and hit Send. > 4) And finally, an experiment. Here's yet another of these lujvo: > {selsnemojmo'i}. What meaning do you think I have in mind for it? > > I conjecture that it is "*d=C3=A9j=C3=A0 vu*," although {selsneselmojmo'i= } is > better, because what is recollected is the memory, not the entity that do= es > the recollecting, and eliding one "sel" but not the other would be > inconsistent. > Hmm, good guess, that is another common memory defect. Not what I was thinking of, though. It's quite possible that what I'm thinking of is simply unguessable, but I have a hint in mind. --047d7b603bce0ee92104d31b54d0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:37 AM, Compu-Celebi <compu-celebi@valint.n= et> wrote:
=20 =20 =20
On 1/11/2013 4:55 PM, Eitan Postavsky wrote:
3) terserspaji: sp2 is surprised by step st3 while traversing stairs, surprised either that it exists or that it doesn't exist; sp2 unexpectedly hits floor when expecting to step on step st3; sp2 unexpectedly hits step st3 when expecting to step on floor.
Every <= i>terserspaji must be an unexpected stepping, not a surprised stepper, bec= ause every terserspaji is a spaji and every spaji is a surprising/startling/unexpected event/action, and terserti are neither events/actions nor spaji.=C2=A0 Therefore, regardless of whether the arguments are mentioned in the order in which you intended their places to be (which I cannot ascertain because "x1" and "x2" are excluded), your place s= tructure is flawed.
Ah, yes, must have had a bi= t of a brainfart. This lujvo is the one I spent the least time thinking abo= ut :S Thanks for your patience.

I propose this alternative (which includes the serti<= font face=3D"Comic Sans MS">, also, as an argument):

x1=3Ds= p1 is an event/action of x2=3Dsp2 unexpectedly stepping off stairs/stairway/steps x3=3Dst2, instead of onto step x4=3Dst3, or ont= o step x3=3Dst4, instead of off stairs/stairway/steps x3=3Dst2
You = are right to include st1 (I believe you meant st1, not st2). That will prob= ably be of more use than st3 when complaining to your friends about how a s= tupidly designed staircase made you stub your toe. I propose, then, that st= 3 be dropped, for, in the language of the CLL chapter Dog House and White H= ouse, st1 and st3 are mutually dependent places (it's almost always the= topmost or bottommost step that gets you).

However, I question the separation of sp1 from the rest of the bridi. W= hat's the use of x1 in your proposed place structure? It just gets in t= he way. My idea was to have it be some sort of implicit-abstraction lujvo. = But then you object that having an implicit-abstraction lujvo with the x1 o= f the tertau being the abstraction is confusing, rightly so, so perhaps thi= s:

serselspaji: sp2, traversing stairs/stairway/steps st1, gets startled b= y taking a step/stride and the ground not being at the expected level for t= he landing foot/terdzu, e.g. by expecting one more step to go when it has a= lready finished the staircase.

(I feel comfortable using "it" for agents when talking about = place structures.)
That /is/ the intended order of places, x1=3Dsp2 and= x2=3Dst1.
Interesting, a bit of {cadzu} is creeping in there... Yes, t= his is a torturedly-implicit abstraction indeed. But, since I've sent t= his word out there already, I'll just go right ahead and hit Send.
4) And finally, an experiment. Here's yet another of these lujvo: {selsnemojmo'i}. What meaning do you think I have in min= d for it?
I conjecture that it is "d= =C3=A9j=C3=A0 vu," although {selsneselmojmo'i} is better, because what is recollecte= d is the memory, not the entity that does the recollecting, and eliding one "sel" but not the other would be inconsistent.<= br>
Hmm, good guess, that is another common m= emory defect. Not what I was thinking of, though. It's quite possible t= hat what I'm thinking of is simply unguessable, but I have a hint in mi= nd.

--047d7b603bce0ee92104d31b54d0-- --===============4320800781494288923== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ jbovlaste mailing list jbovlaste@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/jbovlaste --===============4320800781494288923==--