Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:42:49 -0800 (PST)
From: la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <da4dbaad-92bf-4aaa-8aef-592892e34736@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ8VDWDJ3xeZOnb4O-GcOiVYOocVM1YQ31BZt+SNrrd9kDc+A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAOQ8VDWDJ3xeZOnb4O-GcOiVYOocVM1YQ31BZt+SNrrd9kDc+A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [lojban] Re: Advanced Place Stucture Mangling
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_2074_7461292.1358919769313"
X-Spam_score: 1.4
X-Spam_score_int: 14
X-Spam_bar: +
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "stodi.digitalkingdom.org", has
 identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
 has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
 similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
 the administrator of that system for details.
 
 Content preview:  On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:21:43 AM UTC+4, tsani wrote:
    > > P.S. (as in pre scriptum ?) This e-mail turned out longer than I had
   > originally intended, but I think that it's worthwhile letting the mailing
    > list in on this discovery I made just yesterday and expanded today in >
    #lojban. It gets technical at times, but I have provided translations for
    > all the examples, which I have tried to use as much as possible to make
    > things more tangible. > > We all know that {be} works on the selbri-level,
    allowing us to inject > sumti directly into the selbri. We also know that
    the primary use for this > is in description sumti, where we can select an
    x1 based on definite (i.e. > non-zo'e) values in other places. (We also probably
    agree that {lo broda be > fa ko'a} is either nonsense or equivent to {lo
   broda no'u ko'a}, but that's > outside the scope of this e-mail.) However,
    being done on a selbri-level, > what's really happening with {be} is that
    we're creating "new" selbri each > time we use it. > > Consider {lo klama
    be la .bastyn.}: we create a new selbri with the > definition "x1 goes to
    Boston ..." in order to select the x1 and get a > referent and whatever.
   (The actual way articles work and possible issues > with that is also outside
    the scope of this e-mail.) What's really > interesting, however, isn't description
    sumti. (In fact, that's pretty > boring.) What's really interesting is *what*
    is in the "..." of my previous > definition of {klama be la .bastyn.}. The
    full definition is "x1 goes to > Boston from x2 via x3 by means x4." > >
   Notice how the x3 place of {klama} has become the x2 place of {klama be >
   ko'a}. Indeed, injecting a sumti has the effect of moving all the later >
   places *forward*. What repercussions does this have on top-level bridi? >
   > Consider {dunda}, "x1 gives x2 to x3." Given the above proof of place >
   promotion, {dunda be ko'a} should mean "x1 gives ko'a to x2." Considering
   > that {ko'a broda ko'e} equals by definition {ko'a ko'e broda}, {mi do dunda
    > be ko'a} means "I give you [...] 
 
 Content analysis details:   (1.4 points, 5.0 required)
 
  pts rule name              description
 ---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM          Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
                             (gleki.is.my.name[at]gmail.com)
  1.5 RCVD_IN_NJABL_SPAM     RBL: NJABL: sender is confirmed spam source
                             [209.85.214.184 listed in combined.njabl.org]
  0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED  RBL: ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to DNSWL
                             was blocked.  See
                             http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
                              for more information.
                             [209.85.214.184 listed in list.dnswl.org]
 -0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
  0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
 -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU          Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
                             domain
  0.1 DKIM_SIGNED            Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid
 -0.1 DKIM_VALID             Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature

------=_Part_2074_7461292.1358919769313
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1


On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:21:43 AM UTC+4, tsani wrote:
>
> P.S. (as in pre scriptum ?) This e-mail turned out longer than I had 
> originally intended, but I think that it's worthwhile letting the mailing 
> list in on this discovery I made just yesterday and expanded today in 
> #lojban. It gets technical at times, but I have provided translations for 
> all the examples, which I have tried to use as much as possible to make 
> things more tangible.
>
> We all know that {be} works on the selbri-level, allowing us to inject 
> sumti directly into the selbri. We also know that the primary use for this 
> is in description sumti, where we can select an x1 based on definite (i.e. 
> non-zo'e) values in other places. (We also probably agree that {lo broda be 
> fa ko'a} is either nonsense or equivent to {lo broda no'u ko'a}, but that's 
> outside the scope of this e-mail.) However, being done on a selbri-level, 
> what's really happening with {be} is that we're creating "new" selbri each 
> time we use it. 
>
> Consider {lo klama be la .bastyn.}: we create a new selbri with the 
> definition "x1 goes to Boston ..." in order to select the x1 and get a 
> referent and whatever. (The actual way articles work and possible issues 
> with that is also outside the scope of this e-mail.) What's really 
> interesting, however, isn't description sumti. (In fact, that's pretty 
> boring.) What's really interesting is *what* is in the "..." of my previous 
> definition of {klama be la .bastyn.}. The full definition is "x1 goes to 
> Boston from x2 via x3 by means x4."
>
> Notice how the x3 place of {klama} has become the x2 place of {klama be 
> ko'a}. Indeed, injecting a sumti has the effect of moving all the later 
> places *forward*. What repercussions does this have on top-level bridi? 
>
> Consider {dunda}, "x1 gives x2 to x3." Given the above proof of place 
> promotion, {dunda be ko'a} should mean "x1 gives ko'a to x2." Considering 
> that {ko'a broda ko'e} equals by definition {ko'a ko'e broda}, {mi do dunda 
> be ko'a} means "I give you ko'a," mirroring the English structure! By using 
> {be} and the ability to move places into the bridi-head, we can create 
> pseudo-"1 3 2" argument order at the cost of *one* syllable. The actual SE 
> conversion required to achieve the true structure is  {se te se} which is 
> three syllables long and requires forethought. In a way, this selbri-level 
> manipulation can almost be thought of as "afterthought SE conversion."
>
> We can create even wonkier place structures by using {be FA}. Basic {se} 
> can be achieved using {ko'a broda be fa ko'e}, e.g. {lo nu lo pampe'o cu 
> darno cu badri be fa mi} "My lover being far is what saddens me." The real 
> complexity of the transformation comes from moving bridi-tail sumti into 
> the bridi-head: {.i mi do lo barda cu vecnu be lo plise} "I you for a lot 
> sold an apple." (Mirroring the Lojban with English leads to ugliness, but 
> I'll try to keep it up so long as it's understandable.) The argument order 
> in that case is 1-2-4-3, with a corresponding SE conversion of {te ve te}. 
>
> From this, I concluded the generality that* when all sumti are moved to 
> the bridi head, the effect of {broda be fa xi ny ko'a} is to send the x_n 
> place to the end of the place structure.* In a way, this can be thought 
> of as "remote" FA, as it allows us to perform a FA operation on the selbri 
> level, outside the formal place structure.
>
> An example, with corresponding argument order and SE conversion: 
> {.i lo tcadu zdani lo nurma zdani cu klama be fa mi} "To the city house 
> from the country house go I." 2-3-1 {se te}
>
> Before continuing, we must recall that {se} is applied before {be}, as {lo 
> se broda be ko'a} has {ko'a} in broda1.
>
> Combining this type of {be} operation with ordinary SE conversions, we can 
> produce extremely cryptically ordered selbri:
> {.i lo ni se pluka lo ka pinxe lo ckafi kei kei do te zmadu be mi) "In the 
> amount of enjoying drinking coffee, you are greater than me." 3-1-2 {te se}
> What is truly shocking about this is that we see a {te}-conversion, but 
> the selbri becomes reduced into a binary predicate, i.e. a predicate with 
> two argument slots, because of the {be ko'a}.
>
> Everything above is what I had discovered yesterday. What follows is what 
> I discovered today.
>
> It is (currently) ungrammatical to use {be} twice on the same selbri. (Not 
> that I'd necessarily want it to be.) Indeed we have {bei} for that. But, we 
> can think of the following as "forethought bei." 
>
> Using {ke} to create a bracket, we can box one selbri inside another, {ke 
> broda [ke'e]} has the {broda} selbri trapped inside the {ke..ke'e} selbri. 
> The {ke..ke'e} selbri has the same structure as the inner selbri, and this 
> is what we can exploit to avoid using {bei}. Formally, {ke broda ke'e be 
> ko'a} is equivalent to {broda be ko'a}, but if broda already has linkargs, 
> i.e. injected sumti with {be}, we can't move the outer {be} inside. 
>
> Consider {klama be la .bastyn.}, "x1 goes to Boston from x2 ..." We can't 
> attach another {be} to this selbri because it would be ungrammatical, but 
> we can box it inside {ke..ke'e} and make use of the place structure 
> transparency outlined in the previous paragraph and *then* use {be}: {ke 
> klama be la bastyn [be'o] be la montre'al}, "x1 goes to Boston from 
> Montreal via x2 in vehicle x3. In cases where the first sumti does not end 
> in a selbri, the use of the second {be} will cause (a lot) of elision. 
>
> Although "forethought" {bei} might appear utterly useless at first, it can 
> be used to avoid using multiple FA. Suppose we want to specify the x3 then 
> the x2 with injected sumti. Normally, we need to use {broda be fi ko'a bei 
> fe ko'e} because that's the way it works when you only have one selbri, but 
> when we use ke..ke'e as a selbri "box", we get to cheat, by considering 
> that the inner selbri has its own place structure:
> {.i mi fi lo karce cu ke klama be fi la .montre'al. [be'o] [ke'e] be la 
> .bastyn.}
> First, we consider the inner selbri {klama be fi la .montre'al.} as having 
> the place structure "x1 goes to x2 from Montreal via x3 in x4."
> Then, we box that selbri inside the ke..ke'e brackets, and use be again, 
> to fill the x2, i.e. the destination, with {la .bastyn.}. This yields the 
> place structure "x1 goes to Boston from Montreal via x2 in x3."
> Finally, when we do formal place filling, we use *{fi}* to specify the 
> vehicle, in this case {lo karce}
> "I, in the car, go from Montreal to Boston."
>
> Although using ke..ke'e by itself to create a place structure-transparent 
> "box" is pretty interesting, we can create even what I consider to be the 
> most advanced structure changes by using a combination of all the tools 
> outlined above: SE, {ke..ke'e}-boxing, {be}, and {bei}.
>
> In sum, I have showed some ways that we can achieve more complicated 
> argument order by usually using {be}, moving sumti into the bridi head, and 
> using some FA in weird places, and how we can cheat the system with 
> "forethought bei" by using selbri-boxing.
>
> Any comments, thoughts, violent objections, hate mail, or flame wars are 
> appreciated as usual iu
>

banli sai mu'o  u'i


> .i mi'e la tsani mu'o
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/KwQRXKue6CAJ.
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.


------=_Part_2074_7461292.1358919769313
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br>On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:21:43 AM UTC+4, tsani wrote:<block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-le=
ft: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div>P.S. (as in pre scriptum ?) Thi=
s e-mail turned out longer than I had originally intended, but I think that=
 it's worthwhile letting the mailing list in on this discovery I made just =
yesterday and expanded today in #lojban. It gets technical at times, but I =
have provided translations for all the examples, which I have tried to use =
as much as possible to make things more tangible.</div>

<div><br></div>We all know that {be} works on the selbri-level, allowing us=
 to inject sumti directly into the selbri. We also know that the primary us=
e for this is in description sumti, where we can select an x1 based on defi=
nite (i.e. non-zo'e) values in other places. (We also probably agree that {=
lo broda be fa ko'a} is either nonsense or equivent to {lo broda no'u ko'a}=
, but that's outside the scope of this e-mail.) However, being done on a se=
lbri-level, what's really happening with {be} is that we're creating "new" =
selbri each time we use it. <br>

<br>Consider {lo klama be la .bastyn.}: we create a new selbri with the def=
inition "x1 goes to Boston ..." in order to select the x1 and get a referen=
t and whatever. (The actual way articles work and possible issues with that=
 is also outside the scope of this e-mail.) What's really interesting, howe=
ver, isn't description sumti. (In fact, that's pretty boring.) What's reall=
y interesting is *what* is in the "..." of my previous definition of {klama=
 be la .bastyn.}. The full definition is "x1 goes to Boston from x2 via x3 =
by means x4."<br>

<br>Notice how the x3 place of {klama} has become the x2 place of {klama be=
 ko'a}. Indeed, injecting a sumti has the effect of moving all the later pl=
aces *forward*. What repercussions does this have on top-level bridi? <br>

<br>Consider {dunda}, "x1 gives x2 to x3." Given the above proof of place p=
romotion, {dunda be ko'a} should mean "x1 gives ko'a to x2." Considering th=
at {ko'a broda ko'e} equals by definition {ko'a ko'e broda}, {mi do dunda b=
e ko'a} means "I give you ko'a," mirroring the English structure! By using =
{be} and the ability to move places into the bridi-head, we can create pseu=
do-"1 3 2" argument order at the cost of *one* syllable. The actual SE conv=
ersion required to achieve the true structure is &nbsp;{se te se} which is =
three syllables long and requires forethought. In a way, this selbri-level =
manipulation can almost be thought of as "afterthought SE conversion."<br>

<br>We can create even wonkier place structures by using {be FA}. Basic {se=
} can be achieved using {ko'a broda be fa ko'e}, e.g. {lo nu lo pampe'o cu =
darno cu badri be fa mi} "My lover being far is what saddens me." The real =
complexity of the transformation comes from moving bridi-tail sumti into th=
e bridi-head: {.i mi do lo barda cu vecnu be lo plise} "I you for a lot sol=
d an apple." (Mirroring the Lojban with English leads to ugliness, but I'll=
 try to keep it up so long as it's understandable.) The argument order in t=
hat case is 1-2-4-3, with a corresponding SE conversion of {te ve te}. <br>

<br>From this, I concluded the generality that<i>&nbsp;when all sumti are m=
oved to the bridi head, the effect of {broda be fa xi ny ko'a} is to send t=
he x_n place to the end of the place structure.</i>&nbsp;In a way, this can=
 be thought of as "remote" FA, as it allows us to perform a FA operation on=
 the selbri level, outside the formal place structure.<div>

<br></div><div>An example, with corresponding argument order and SE convers=
ion:&nbsp;</div><div>{.i lo tcadu zdani lo nurma zdani cu klama be fa mi} "=
To the city house from the country house go I." 2-3-1 {se te}</div>

<div><br></div><div>Before continuing, we must recall that {se} is applied =
before {be}, as {lo se broda be ko'a} has {ko'a} in broda1.</div><div><br><=
/div><div>Combining this type of {be} operation with ordinary SE conversion=
s, we can produce extremely cryptically ordered selbri:</div>

<div>{.i lo ni se pluka lo ka pinxe lo ckafi kei kei do te zmadu be mi) "In=
 the amount of enjoying drinking coffee, you are greater than me." 3-1-2 {t=
e se}</div><div>What is truly shocking about this is that we see a {te}-con=
version, but the selbri becomes reduced into a binary predicate, i.e. a pre=
dicate with two argument slots, because of the {be ko'a}.</div>

<div><br></div><div>Everything above is what I had discovered yesterday. Wh=
at follows is what I discovered today.</div><div><br></div><div>It is (curr=
ently) ungrammatical to use {be} twice on the same selbri. (Not that I'd ne=
cessarily want it to be.) Indeed we have {bei} for that. But, we can think =
of the following as "forethought bei."&nbsp;</div>

<div><br></div><div>Using {ke} to create a bracket, we can box one selbri i=
nside another, {ke broda [ke'e]} has the {broda} selbri trapped inside the =
{ke..ke'e} selbri. The {ke..ke'e} selbri has the same structure as the inne=
r selbri, and this is what we can exploit to avoid using {bei}. Formally, {=
ke broda ke'e be ko'a} is equivalent to {broda be ko'a}, but if broda alrea=
dy has linkargs, i.e. injected sumti with {be}, we can't move the outer {be=
} inside.&nbsp;</div>

<div><br></div><div>Consider {klama be la .bastyn.}, "x1 goes to Boston fro=
m x2 ..." We can't attach another {be} to this selbri because it would be u=
ngrammatical, but we can box it inside {ke..ke'e} and make use of the place=
 structure transparency outlined in the previous paragraph and *then* use {=
be}: {ke klama be la bastyn [be'o] be la montre'al}, "x1 goes to Boston fro=
m Montreal via x2 in vehicle x3. In cases where the first sumti does not en=
d in a selbri, the use of the second {be} will cause (a lot) of elision.&nb=
sp;</div>

<div><br></div><div>Although "forethought" {bei} might appear utterly usele=
ss at first, it can be used to avoid using multiple FA. Suppose we want to =
specify the x3 then the x2 with injected sumti. Normally, we need to use {b=
roda be fi ko'a bei fe ko'e} because that's the way it works when you only =
have one selbri, but when we use ke..ke'e as a selbri "box", we get to chea=
t, by considering that the inner selbri has its own place structure:</div>

<div>{.i mi fi lo karce cu ke klama be fi la .montre'al. [be'o] [ke'e] be l=
a .bastyn.}</div><div>First, we consider the inner selbri {klama be fi la .=
montre'al.} as having the place structure "x1 goes to x2 from Montreal via =
x3 in x4."</div>

<div>Then, we box that selbri inside the ke..ke'e brackets, and use be agai=
n, to fill the x2, i.e. the destination, with {la .bastyn.}. This yields th=
e place structure "x1 goes to Boston from Montreal via x2 in x3."</div>

<div>Finally, when we do formal place filling, we use *{fi}* to specify the=
 vehicle, in this case {lo karce}</div><div>"I, in the car, go from Montrea=
l to Boston."</div><div><br></div><div>Although using ke..ke'e by itself to=
 create a place structure-transparent "box" is pretty interesting, we can c=
reate even what I consider to be the most advanced structure changes by usi=
ng a combination of all the tools outlined above: SE, {ke..ke'e}-boxing, {b=
e}, and {bei}.</div>

<div><br></div><div>In sum, I have showed some ways that we can achieve mor=
e complicated argument order by usually using {be}, moving sumti into the b=
ridi head, and using some FA in weird places, and how we can cheat the syst=
em with "forethought bei" by using selbri-boxing.</div>

<div><br></div><div>Any comments, thoughts, violent objections, hate mail, =
or flame wars are appreciated as usual iu</div></blockquote><div><br></div>=
<div>banli sai mu'o &nbsp;u'i</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmai=
l_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;=
padding-left: 1ex;"><div><br></div><div>.i mi'e la tsani mu'o</div>
</blockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
lojban" group.<br />
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msg/lojban/-/KwQRXKue6CAJ">https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/Kw=
QRXKue6CAJ</a>.<br />=20
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou=
ps.com.<br />

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban=
?hl=3Den.<br />


------=_Part_2074_7461292.1358919769313--