Received: from mail-pz0-f56.google.com ([209.85.210.56]:46638) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1S77mX-0005pm-PQ; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:07:45 -0700 Received: by dano9 with SMTP id o9sf5772479dan.1 for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:07:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; 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:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OH8ghajU0gWbtxxTvNLhCRkQBKl7+bQYH7peYqe1FiQ=; b=LEoOgdT/LMsnjqTVxtV5tTYxIBY9Yz6LCuQEYKS4ZwhNRIzfdC6KYN35/1ff65m+Bf LyuPctT///rFvFdnHwRsreiwHWNziYlFaerm4LTa30g7fNJi7ORY/xQWOMYSs22cFGEq sVML8vkSgjTuoIUtc4Jm+EqLaeWcAcAiIhprY= Received: by 10.68.131.37 with SMTP id oj5mr1558686pbb.12.1331568443938; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.68.28.170 with SMTP id c10ls1331990pbh.3.gmail; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.201.129 with SMTP id ka1mr1269878pbc.6.1331568443312; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.201.129 with SMTP id ka1mr1269877pbc.6.1331568443301; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pz0-f48.google.com (mail-pz0-f48.google.com [209.85.210.48]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p7si19845675pbq.0.2012.03.12.09.07.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.48 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.48; Received: by mail-pz0-f48.google.com with SMTP id p13so6254818dad.35 for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.203.74 with SMTP id ko10mr1955280pbc.125.1331568443212; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:07:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.189.133 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:07:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 13:07:22 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] footnotes, etc? From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Felipe_Gon=E7alves_Assis?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: felipeg.assis@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.48 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=felipeg.assis@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / On 12 March 2012 12:24, Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote: > 2012/3/12 Jorge Llamb=EDas : >> 2012/3/12 Felipe Gon=E7alves Assis : >>> doi xorxes, >>> >>> Can't you define an equivalence relation among valid written texts, >>> another one among valid speech streams, and then pair-up the >>> equivalence classes? >>> >>> Wouldn't that still be an isomorphism? >>> >>> I understand that the concept is more subtle, but the name is still val= id. >> >> OK, as long as it's understood that way, fine. But then what does that >> have to do with the footnotes issue? I'm just saying it is not the >> case that to each speech stream corresponds one spelling and to each >> spelling corresponds one speech stream. > Yeah, that was a side comment by me. I did express myself badly when I said "written text", though, since my point is that there is more to a written text than spelled utterances. > Also, if you want the isomorphism to hold at the level of classes of > texts, then "choose your own adventure" books cannot be translated > into Lojban, since the whole point of them is that one text can be > read in more than one non-equivalent way. So I still say we drop the > "isomorphism" terminology. > We agree on the "choose your own adventure" issue. I only say that there can still be an isomorphism among speech streams and linear streams of text such as those who compose the book, or their possible combinations, as suggested by the physical/typographical organization of the content. mu'o mi'e .asiz. --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.