Received: from mail-vc0-f189.google.com ([209.85.220.189]:55949) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SZrex-0003ul-VO; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:46:42 -0700 Received: by vcbfo14 with SMTP id fo14sf267905vcb.16 for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:46:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-ct-class:x-ct-score:x-ct-refid:x-ct-spam :x-authority-analysis:x-cm-score:message-id:date:from:organization :user-agent:x-accept-language:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-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; bh=srsgpeQjciQuPtAkw016P+0hdCnTqgxBdrvSmqnnC/8=; b=lc4v73Lty65PG54YCG6NjtTJSEdOWdGMp+DR0zoIA3r2ZaFQlKYQ2ceJ5r1ymoUZlt UQPiGbXNjiM0q5Z97zmlS5K75c9Lv99eQW1SOnO6w59y4xM6wyyqLfHltU5uJbNpeBGM ZVsmgZdPAqaJgCQXPwmpoKGgZL5i7MbMHjGgQ= Received: by 10.52.34.8 with SMTP id v8mr1058633vdi.5.1338417985204; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:46:25 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.52.98.99 with SMTP id eh3ls209104vdb.3.gmail; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:46:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.240.229 with SMTP id wd5mr31603065vdc.8.1338417984579; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:46:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.240.229 with SMTP id wd5mr31603064vdc.8.1338417984570; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:46:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eastrmfepo101.cox.net (eastrmfepo101.cox.net. [68.230.241.213]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id ee5si433575vdb.0.2012.05.30.15.46.24; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:46:24 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.213 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.241.213; Received: from eastrmimpo305.cox.net ([68.230.241.237]) by eastrmfepo101.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.04.00 201-2260-137-20101110) with ESMTP id <20120530224624.PEKV18243.eastrmfepo101.cox.net@eastrmimpo305.cox.net> for ; Wed, 30 May 2012 18:46:24 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.101] ([70.187.237.100]) by eastrmimpo305.cox.net with bizsmtp id GNmN1j00D2AfMYu02NmNjK; Wed, 30 May 2012 18:46:23 -0400 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020208.4FC6A340.0009,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=7k1bn6mYLn6jZgnsCX5IyeK1I3GDztM/23liBAFkWus= c=1 sm=1 a=dYDkaTZZu5wA:10 a=h69u0z9dCCgA:10 a=xmHE3fpoGJwA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=MQZuvjT3xUZLKv0gclfWMg==:17 a=8YJikuA2AAAA:8 a=40CBs5rI0_USDcVfLIoA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=dxBpO5_FDU0A:10 a=MQZuvjT3xUZLKv0gclfWMg==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <4FC6A344.7040800@lojban.org> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 18:46:28 -0400 From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" Organization: The Logical Language Group, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Historian: what's up with directional words? References: <20120530210633.GD25777@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> In-Reply-To: <20120530210633.GD25777@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 68.230.241.213 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org 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; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / Robin Lee Powell wrote: > The direction words (pritu, zunle, trixe, etc) are phrased very > strangely: > > zunle = x1 is to the left/left-hand side of x2 which faces/in-frame-of-reference x3. > > What does "which faces" mean? It seems to imply that x2 must have a > natural facing/front, which is bad. Why do we even care about > facing in this contexnt? Pretend that you are multilaterally symmetrical, and that you have no front. Identify what is to your left. Now rotate yourself 180 degrees, and what is "to your left" is what used to be "to your right". Thus your orientation/facing/frame of reference, is essential to defining what "to your left" means. > {mlana} additionally bothers me because you can't say *which* side > something is on with {mlana}, and additionally discussing facing > seems even more bizarre, but at least it gets its own place: > > x1 is to the side of/lateral to x2 and facing x3 from point of view/in-frame-of-reference x4 > > which is an improvement. > > Just wondering what the plan was here. The definition of mlana was intended to cover the case where all that is important is that it is to the side rather than directly in front of you (or behind you), without worrying about left and right, and perhaps allowing for the possibility of being "to the side" in the 3rd dimension as well (ie above/below) in a gravityless situation where up and down are ambiguous. If you have no definable orientation at all (i.e no "front") then you cannot have a "side" - or rather everything is to your "side", and distance is all that matters (lamji, jibni, darno). lojbab -- Bob LeChevalier lojbab@lojban.org www.lojban.org President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc. -- 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@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.