F= rom: Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 = 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: = [lojban] searching

If you defined it the other way, you wouldn't get= quite the same thing by just attaching {poi}. Instead you could wind up lo= oking for a definite shirt, rather than just "some green shirt". {da} would= n't fix this either, because the quantifier would be in the wrong place. (T= hat is, "I'm looking for {da poi crino}" is "There exists a green thing tha= t I'm looking for"; the existential is outside the looking. To move it insi= de you would need an abstractor, which is exactly what gimste-sisku does.)&= nbsp;

Ultimately I agree, {sisku} as currently defined is rather s= trange to consider as the primitive. It feels excessively abstracted from e= veryday life, even if it is occasionally rather compact/precise.

mi'e la latro'a mu'o

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> = wrote:

Yeah, I wasn't looking for a "= we should change lojban suck that..." sort of thing. I assumed there = was some solution.

Just kind of sucks that it's very easy for me to say "I am l= ooking for a green thing in my dresser" (mi sisku lo (ka?) crino lo seldacr= u). But for "I'm looking for my keys", I've either got to spend half = the day spelling it all out, or I guess selkik's tanru works tolerabl= y well "mi troci co zvafa'i lo mi ckiku"

I guess it just seems like an unfortunate definition fo= r sisku given how easy it is to add an object-by-property aspec= t to the searching. i.e. "mi sisku lo creka poi crino" or even = "mi sisku lo crino creka".

meh, it is what it is.

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 1= 2:14 PM, Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com> wrote:

Little correction:

On 8 January 2013 12:08, Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Using Lojban as it is without changing anything, there is a convoluted=
> way to use sisku as-is, like this:
> .i mi sisku lo ka lo mi ckiku cu zvati ce'u kei ro zo'e ne lo zdani

{ro zo'e ne lo mi zdani} distributes, which is bad, so we need to mak= e
it into a mass/set:
{loi ro zo'e ne lo mi zdani} is better, but you could probably use {lo
zdani} outright as a sisku3, in which case you're considering the
house to be a mass/set of all the places within (because xorlo).

.i mi'e la tsani mu'o

--
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@googlegro= ups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.

--
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@googlegro= ups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.googl= e.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.

--
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.