On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 10:06 PM, la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thursday, January 17, 2013 1:34:07 AM UTC+4, L= atro wrote:

=A0Until we know more about how the brain does memory, it seems=20 presumptuous to claim that these are different "concepts" as oppo= sed to=20 different memories.
As gleki has pointed out, there = is significant evidence that the two actually are different. Also, although= it is a small sample, at the time of coming up with this idea several of u= s (tsani, gleki, and I, possibly others) all realized that our ways of inte= racting with these types of memories were significantly different, and that= this seemed to be responsible for several experiences with memory. For exa= mple, I remarked that I remember certain concepts in mathematics in a way m= ore similar to how I remember experiences than to how I remember other fact= s, and that these memories are inevitably more permanent and vivid than the= ir counterparts. gleki remarked that he had a brief epiphany of the importa= nce of this concept before quickly losing it to the lack of a word for it i= n his native language.

Thanks for dragging me into yo= ur team of insurgents zo'o. Honestly, it's not so easy for me to ca= tch the meaning of this new gismu, BUT (!) periodically I start feeling the= meaning of this new word. Probably starting using this word can help me an= d others fully understand the difference between morji and this new one. An= d therefore get rid of polysemy of morji in our minds. Or may be prove t= his concept wrong.

However, going back to lojbab's words of li'i/d= u'u. It's the first time I see a gismu that allows several distinct= NU for one place. Do we have other brivla that can accept several NU ?

Yes. All of them, in every place, although the type o= f abstraction- or even using an abstraction at all- may not make sense, lik= e with {lo nu sutra cu klama lo si'o plise}. The listed NU in certain g= ismu definitions aren't the /only/ allowable ones, they're just tha= t ones that .lojbab. saw were being /used/ in those places when he was goin= g through the definitions.
=A0

morji is NOT restri= cted to du'u. =A0The parenthetical use in the gismu list is NOT a restr= iction (and indeed there aren't really ANY restrictions so long as it i= s grammatical - the semantics of lojban has not been formally defined).

You may say that, but this type analysis is part of the w= ay that the language, as I've seen it in the last few years, has evolve= d. Evolved restriction is not new to natlangs, why should it be new to conl= angs?

One can claim, I think somewhat arbitrarily), that memorizing a quote is a = different sort of memory than a fact or an episode. =A0If so, one might mak= e lujvo based on morji to distinguish the presumably different memory types= of facts, quotes, and episodes, and define the place structure of the lujv= o specific to your more restricted meaning.

(I think I should note that such specialized and restricted-meaning lujvo a= re a type that is not necessarily achievable using jvajvo rules, because we= didn't really build the tools for semantic-rules-based lujvo-making in= to the language - the concept of having rules to determine place structures= was an afterthought regularization devised by Nick Nicolas as a result of = his analysis of patterns of how people actually were making lujvo).

It's been stated already that the problem with going = about this way is that the lujvo that you would want to use for this concep= t have useful jvajvo meanings which are distinct from this concept. "R= emembering something about an experience" and "remembering an exp= erience" are both useful ideas which should have separate terms.

mi'e la latro'a mu'o

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.