On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:

Only truth-functionally, which is my point. Structurally it's more like= x2 =3D x1+x3, just moving the + to a different spot instead of actually in= troducing a -.

I was referring to order, but either wa= y, selsumji isn't anywhere near ideal for "subtraction".
=A0

m= i'e la latro'a mu'o

On Mon, Mar 25, 201= 3 at 1:40 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px= #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 11:32 PM, Ian Johns= on <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:
The problem is that arithmetic is supposed to abstract physical situations.= Addition abstracts the merging of groups, while subtraction abstracts the = removal of a subgroup from a group. In other words, + panra jmina, - panra = vimcu. From this standpoint "6=3D8-2" is essentially "if you= take away 2 from 8 you get 6". {selsumji} fi'o tarmi ku is thinki= ng of "6=3D8-2" as something like "if you put 2 back in 6, y= ou would get 8", which is rather convoluted. It's truth-functional= ly the same, but the character of the description feels different.

But it matches the other math gismu, all of which are "= x1 is the result of x2 <operand> x3".
=A0

mi'e la latro'a mu'o

On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 1:02 AM, la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:

On Monday, March 25, 2013 5:50:26 AM= UTC+4, stevo wrote:

On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 9:11 PM, Ian Joh= nson <blindb...@gmail.com> wrote:
=
Indeed, this has been something that has nagged at the back of my mind sinc= e I started studying the language; there are fairly few words which are suf= ficiently similar to their source language counterparts to help a speaker o= f a source language learn the language more easily.

This is why I say the vocabulary is equally d=EDfficult= for everybody. The memory hooks aren't numerous for any given language= , and they're not consistent enough to make them useful to learn. Total= ly ad hoc words could hardly be more difficult to learn than what we have.= =A0

This algorithm originated in t= he first SciAm paper by JCB. He claimed the existence of global etymology. = sei mi morji Lojban doesnt have any goals to prove the existence of = such thing. The only reason to apply the algorithm is mnemonics. Otherwise = Lojban is completely apriori.

Given that the number of speakers of Romance languages = exceed the number of Chinese speakers I suggest {difro} or similar gismu on= ce again.

However, what I'd like more is not t= o add more gismu but instead to remove some of the existing. The adoption o= f {selsumji}=3D"difference" will teach newbies "predicate re= asoning". If a person can cope with rearranging sumti places and knows= the basic vocabulary then 'ey is already a good speaker of Lojban.

=A0
lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
=A0
=A0

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
=A0
=A0