Received: from mail-vb0-f64.google.com ([209.85.212.64]:59342) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Uo6ur-0006pJ-E0 for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 23:58:34 -0700 Received: by mail-vb0-f64.google.com with SMTP id 10sf670831vbe.9 for ; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 23:58:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender: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=jmDbxB5Jh8BeRo9Mor1WVaXcERINFre9gysV96HQj/c=; b=nCaUJBpwPZSxDvUtTnJG3ody8H3nsE6iEAzTdkT2O/x9/uFa6VSXvWFQSoPahL8mAA +feG6rmeFf6mJ5Wkk5Neo46p1QYxA1xeJzM/EC59i6bsPu9D+X+dL/CRNyGtacfNak9f +vIzvGdLnzHC1nacEO8eUiH2Un2tfWFruiYRDG53fhP9Mxy0zRdpPmbBXiAckBLu++Ap 11rtzp9KrTSIk2l5rIi1+ozxpVVpgTH4JLpUgkNVcYVRmVZGN0dHosOjiydLaZKANVN+ G43ke4T+zETpfUjq4SSs6+s68z+xb/5zpwNpWOmQ8l57QvIOI2hR+WN2U3XX4NJ/DCZE 4tnA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender: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=jmDbxB5Jh8BeRo9Mor1WVaXcERINFre9gysV96HQj/c=; b=oFT0B3TqNQPeb4gFFHtMHyj8ocmyOQoArFYx6xwIzUgKwLrJi8SAnM6Y2iEp62xdPz jf7YLq6cSGLhRxHLm4PcPziXQDfwToaAxzzFHbTTFOTlpsVF8ovSNNGjFL3YSucMESZn CP+DnTsqUQGQwLW9ydeaR7bwK265SIR2oPqPmNGpCI9GhMSI4wB1YYAvko0jG18LaVtp dhr1orsIyVnKedc3hv3YxWvxd2fzgtvgjq7afZi5QP05DXxpQu8x3HdSCGGaeZalRjz2 fblZtNJW3wUq5rAyibXbqxqoHWDXU36ooSlpXNKpM9oLH+crTbCgPQ03VlEHKwzqnAB8 QgQQ== X-Received: by 10.49.30.105 with SMTP id r9mr253391qeh.27.1371365894650; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 23:58:14 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.49.121.163 with SMTP id ll3ls718636qeb.77.gmail; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 23:58:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.49.63.195 with SMTP id i3mr209344qes.29.1371365894247; Sat, 15 Jun 2013 23:58:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2013 23:58:13 -0700 (PDT) From: la arxokuna To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-Id: <973cb611-f8d2-4aa0-85b0-e78d355e1664@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: References: <8561d566-8f8b-4b46-9e7b-5fdbc1367b33@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] "we" and masses. A bug in the CLL? MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com 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: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2495_6713815.1371365893782" X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.1 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / ------=_Part_2495_6713815.1371365893782 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sunday, June 16, 2013 10:38:21 AM UTC+4, aionys wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 11:11 PM, la arxokuna > > wrote: > >> First let me show an extract from the loglan dictionary. >> >> mio (p) we/us/ourselves, in the "I/me and others independently" sense,= =20 >> the 1st 3rd person multiple variable. Equivalent to 'mi, e da'. Cf. mu/m= o=20 >> for the "you and I/me" sense of we/us, and muu/muo for the "you and I an= d=20 >> others" sense of we/us. >> mu (p) we/us/ourselves, in the "you and I/me jointly" sense, the 1st 2nd= =20 >> person set variable. Equivalent to 'mi ze tu'. Cf. mo for the "you and I= /me=20 >> independently" sense of we/us, miu/mio for the "I and others" sense of= =20 >> we/us, and muu/muo for the "you and I and others" sense of we/us. >> miu (p) we/us/ourselves, in the "I/me and others jointly" sense, the 1st= =20 >> 3rd person set variable. Equivalent to 'mi ze da'. Cf. mu/mo for the "yo= u=20 >> and I/me" sense of we/us, and muu/muo for the "you and I and others" sen= se=20 >> of we/us. >> mo (p) we/us/ourselves, in the "you and I/me independently" sense, the= =20 >> 1st 2nd person multiple variable. Equivalent to 'mi, e tu'. Cf. mu for t= he=20 >> "you and I/me jointly" sense of we/us, miu/mio for the "I and others" se= nse=20 >> of we/us, and muu/muo for the "you and I and others" sense of we/us. >> >> What one might notice first is that there is no equivalent to "mio/miu"= =20 >> which corresponds to English "we".=20 >> >> "we" is defined in Wiktionary as "The speakers/writers, or the=20 >> speaker/writer and at least one other person." so the meaning is pretty= =20 >> clear. >> > > Yeah. That's {mi}. > No {mi =3D le cusku be dei}=20 "we" =3D {da poi na'ei du mi gi'e prenu zo'u mi .e da} =20 > >> However, the CLL says "English-speakers often suffer because they cannot= =20 >> easily distinguish =93mi'o=94 from =93mi'a=94 "=20 >> which is indeed true. I don't understand why Lojban doesn't have "we" in= =20 >> the sense English, Chinese, Russian, Arabic, Hindi and Spanish have it= =20 >> (although i suggested mi'ai a= =20 >> few days ago). >> >> Now to the main issue. Even if we look at the remaining "mu/mo" we'll se= e=20 >> that Lojban has only one of them. >> >> The CLL says (regarding KOhA3) >> >> "All of these pro-sumti represent masses. For example, =93mi'o=94 is the= same=20 >> as =93mi joi do=94, the mass of me and you considered jointly." >> This means we can't talk say "Each of us carries the piano" vs. "We as a= =20 >> mass carry the piano" as (at least what Randall Holmes says) a mass shou= ld=20 >> not be converted into the conjunction of its component parts by any logi= cal=20 >> operator because strictly speaking it shouldn't come with a privileged= =20 >> partition >> >> However, jvs has two=20 >> definitions, the second one (by selpahi) defining {mi'o} as "mi jo'u do= "=20 >> entered in December 2012. I don't remember any discussions of this issue= at=20 >> that time. >> >> I don't know if it should be {ro mi'o bevri} vs. {lu'o mi'o bevri} or= =20 >> {ro lu'a mi'o bevri} vs. {lu'o mi'o bevri}. >> >> So should we change the CLL to say it means {jo'u}, not {joi}? >> =20 >> --=20 >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s=20 >> "lojban" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send a= n=20 >> email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com . >> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com >> . >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> =20 >> =20 >> > > > > --=20 > mu'o mi'e .aionys. > > .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o > (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) > --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. ------=_Part_2495_6713815.1371365893782 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sunday, June 16, 2013 10:38:21 AM UTC+4, aionys wrote:
On Sat, Jun 1= 5, 2013 at 11:11 PM, la arxokuna <gleki.is...@gm= ail.com> wrote:
First let me show an extract from the loglan dictionary.

mio (p) we/us/ourselves, in the "I/me and others independently" sense= , the 1st 3rd person multiple variable. Equivalent to 'mi, e da'. Cf. mu/mo= for the "you and I/me" sense of we/us, and muu/muo for the "you and I and = others" sense of we/us.
mu (p) we/us/ourselves, in the "you and I/me jointly" sense, the 1st 2= nd person set variable. Equivalent to 'mi ze tu'. Cf. mo for the "you and I= /me independently" sense of we/us, miu/mio for the "I and others" sense of = we/us, and muu/muo for the "you and I and others" sense of we/us.
miu (p) we/us/ourselves, in the "I/me and others jointly" sense, the 1= st 3rd person set variable. Equivalent to 'mi ze da'. Cf. mu/mo for the "yo= u and I/me" sense of we/us, and muu/muo for the "you and I and others" sens= e of we/us.
mo (p) we/us/ourselves, in the "you and I/me independently" sense, the= 1st 2nd person multiple variable. Equivalent to 'mi, e tu'. Cf. mu for the= "you and I/me jointly" sense of we/us, miu/mio for the "I and others" sens= e of we/us, and muu/muo for the "you and I and others" sense of we/us.

What one might notice first is that there is no e= quivalent to "mio/miu" which corresponds to English "we". 
<= br>
"we" is defined in Wiktionary as "The speakers/writers, or th= e speaker/writer and at least one other person." so the meaning is pretty c= lear.

Yeah. That's {mi}.
=

No {mi =3D le cusku be dei} 

<= div>"we" =3D {da poi na'ei du mi gi'e prenu zo'u mi .e da}

 
However, t= he CLL says "En= glish-speakers often suffer because they cannot easily distinguish =93mi'o= =94 from =93mi'a=94" which is indeed true. I don't understand why Lojba= n doesn't have "we" in the sense English, Chinese, Russian, Arabic, Hindi a= nd Spanish have it (although i suggested mi'ai a few days ago).

Now to the main issue. Even if we look at the remaining= "mu/mo" we'll see that Lojban has only one of them.

The CLL says (regarding KOhA3)

"All of these pro-sumti represent masses. For example, =93mi'o=94 is the sa= me as =93mi joi do=94, the mass of me and you considered jointly."
This means we can't talk say "Each of us carries the piano" vs. "We as a = mass carry the piano" as (at least what Randall Holmes says) a mass should = not be converted into the conjunction of its component parts by any logical= operator because strictly speaking it shouldn't come with a privileged par= tition

However, jvs has two definitions, the second one (b= y selpahi) defining  {mi'o} as "mi jo'u do" entered in December 2012. = I don't remember any discussions of this issue at that time.

I don't know if  it should be  {ro mi'o bevri= } vs. {lu'o mi'o bevri}  or {ro lu'a mi'o bevri} vs. {lu'o mi'o bevri}= .

So should we change the CLL to say it means= {jo'u}, not {joi}?

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



--
mu'o mi'e= .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi pat= fu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

--
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 
------=_Part_2495_6713815.1371365893782--