From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Mar 20 11:17:43 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:17:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FLPst-0004Xe-6R for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:17:43 -0800 Received: from mail.foraynewmedia.com ([69.55.237.146]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA1:24) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FLPsq-0004XW-Nt for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:17:42 -0800 Received: (qmail 99675 invoked from network); 20 Mar 2006 19:17:38 -0000 Received: from 82-36-195-44.cable.ubr01.sutt.blueyonder.co.uk (HELO ?10.0.1.99?) (jimdabell-jim@82.36.195.44) by mail.foraynewmedia.com with EXP1024-RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 20 Mar 2006 19:17:38 -0000 From: Jim Dabell To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: lojban-beginners Digest V5 #41 Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:20:06 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9 References: <4410D229.3070002@online.de> In-Reply-To: <4410D229.3070002@online.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200603201920.06537.jim-digitalkingdom.org-lojban@jimdabell.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 3131 X-Approved-By: jim-digitalkingdom.org-lojban@jimdabell.com X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jim-digitalkingdom.org-lojban@jimdabell.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners On Friday 10 March 2006 01:11, klaus schmirler wrote: > Alex Joseph Martini wrote: > > Is the point here to decide how {pritu} aught to be defined, or how it > > currently is defined? This issue seems to be getting a little blurred. > > Yes. I find the definitions, especially, but not only of the places, a > little too abstract for learning. They should all have some notes on > their purpose, a dictionary giving sentences with appropriate situations. Isn't this what jbovlaste is for? Sadly the examples section is blank. Unfortunately, I'm still quite lost as to the status of pritu. Are we all beginners speculating, or was somebody responding to this thread speaking authoritatively? Should I cross-post this to another mailing list? It seems to me that there's (fairly) wide agreement here that this interpretation is the correct one: la .iulias. pritu la mari,as. la klaudias. From Claudia's perspective, Julia is to the right of Maria. The direction in which any of them are facing is not specified. Presumably to be used in situations where the direction Claudia is facing is already established or observable. However, if we're all just beginners speculating, then our agreement isn't worth very much if we're agreeing on the wrong interpretation. Although Lojban's goal might be to reduce ambiguity, it seems the word definitions themselves are ambiguous! -- Jim