Received: from mail-ob0-f190.google.com ([209.85.214.190]:60337) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1Vt2yV-0008Mr-Om for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:18:56 -0800 Received: by mail-ob0-f190.google.com with SMTP id wm4sf1490307obc.7 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:18:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=RdKBLpnNBpnW97J/1pAfIGB7V9wOg5Cy8K0dVTE2GV4=; b=h7DiqeLvFwg59kCpCBqGx79HM+YmvYn1ovZuUP2Ep/eJBAh2pwTtDUXiDC6HWOt39y EwRSSQ/wY2nQ2KWfXhbDsaOBHIhaq50rr3+wzQWJG4xrySClmxV7ehX2dp+OBssrlTg6 0FSOzrOqfNwVaj8Ya6Xr3xDNOOYztClO3s7QOOHYTN2zl9MFEFwEh6WV6NHL8FMTg6zV QZdXP0jewAL7AqYxSBXaWIFLVmRhH0gCxQmot47PnB81PqRFyRLcExDsngsvgTc+bNov dZV6TO20ZKz6G9PQTvBXvi5BcpwPdhUmw01i54/2AG6QJLZXs7y4OYrw5qcadTyAHJ4a 7ftw== X-Received: by 10.49.116.169 with SMTP id jx9mr630866qeb.0.1387318721544; Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:18:41 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.49.12.241 with SMTP id b17ls2754436qec.11.gmail; Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:18:41 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.236.209.134 with SMTP id s6mr7302293yho.40.1387318721010; Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:18:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ve0-x229.google.com (mail-ve0-x229.google.com [2607:f8b0:400c:c01::229]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x7si910016qcn.1.2013.12.17.14.18.40 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:18:40 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lytlesw@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::229 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c01::229; Received: by mail-ve0-x229.google.com with SMTP id c14so4888436vea.28 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:18:40 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.52.240.201 with SMTP id wc9mr1888875vdc.60.1387318720809; Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:18:40 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.58.161.48 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Dec 2013 14:18:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1387299891.60171.YahooMailNeo@web181106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <3f955e44-a4ca-4c9c-ba07-ed82f6dcd1d8@googlegroups.com> <20131217120048.3e494cd3@aol.com> <1387299891.60171.YahooMailNeo@web181106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> From: MorphemeAddict Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2013 17:18:10 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Problems with gismu To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lytlesw@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lytlesw@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::229 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lytlesw@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=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=20cf307ca5188b532e04edc24f33 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --20cf307ca5188b532e04edc24f33 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable One of the results of the gismu list is that it helps to organize similar concepts together, by number, order, and choice of arguments. This will (hopefully) make LoCCanX easier to create. stevo On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:04 PM, John E Clifford wro= te: > 1342 word is a short list?! It is too short for some purposes (natural > history, I suppose, if kinkajous need a gismu), too long for others (easy > memorization, the most obvious) and poorly designed for most other purpos= es > (part of not being about semantic primes, alas). The point about chaotic > places (even given basic meanings) is well founded: the lack of general > positional meaning is a common difficulty for learning the language (see > forty years of case proposals -- which, oddly, is not where this proposal > seems to go). Given the body of existing Lojban text, none of this > matters, of course, except as another note in the Logjam3 (or 6 or 7 as i= t > is now): another thing to do better next time. > ------------------------------ > *From:* Gleki Arxokuna > *To:* lojban@googlegroups.com > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 17, 2013 10:12 AM > *Subject:* Re: [lojban] Problems with gismu > > > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Wuzzy wrote: > > Am Tue, 17 Dec 2013 01:22:51 -0800 (PST) > schrieb lorxus : > > > coi ro do > > > > It seems like for a language that prides itself on regularity, ease > > of learning and use, and logic, Lojban sure has weird and incomplete > > gismu. > > > > A given gismu can have anywhere from 1 to 5 places of varying types, > > some of them a sign of gismu bloat, and there are even a few > > extremely obvious gismu with clear counterparts are excluded. > > My > > proposals: first, make all gismu be exactly 3 places long, with the > > first an agent, the second a patient, and the third a beneficiary - > > loosely. For gismu like {blanu}, we might have "x1 is blue of shade > > x2 to observer x3", or something like that; {zdani} might be "x1 is a > > house for x2 owned by x3". > I don=92t like your definition of {zdani} because it makes an owner > mandatory. If there=92s no owner, it=92s not a {zdani} then. The current > =93zdani=94 must not not be neccessarily a house. A =93zdani=94 is a *hom= e* of > someone. > > > Yes, zdani =3D se xabju, an inhabited thing or place. > > It could also be a bird=92s nest. So the idea of ownership makes > no sense here. For a building which is a house, see =93zdadi'u=94. This > also does not include ownership. If you really insist of including > ownership, you could just make another lujvo which includes =93ponse=94. > Briefly, your proposed =93zdani=94 is probably too overly specific. > > Your idea of forcing exactly 3 places for all gismu would not work for > quite some concepts. > The idea of requiring all gismu to follow a =93agent, patient, > beneficiary=94 convention does not make any sense to me. There are > relationships which simply don=92t fit into this pattern. > First of all, everything which is slightly more abstract is unlikely to > fit into this pattern. Things like addition, subtraction or the logical > AND. Especially =93dilcu=94, which needs the 4th place for the remainder. > What=92s with =93klama=94? 3 places. Also I can=92t picture an =93agent, > patient, beneficiary=94 relationship for =93klama=94. And, and, and =85 > It seems to me that you=92re trying to force a regularity upon concepts > > And why does every gismu need an =93agent=94? That=92s highly limiting in= my > opinion. We have =93gasnu=94 (for example) for that. > > > > One can always use {gau}, {seva'u} although "beneficiary" sounds too > metaphoric to me and can be talked about in the context of N-paradigm, no= t > current "rational" Lojbanic system. > > And as I said, ag > > But the biggest problem with your proposal is that its impact would be > extreme. > First of all, most, if not all current Lojban writings would be > invalidated. > > > No if lorxus creates numerous new gismu with "correct" place structure. > > > Also, the regular lujvo which have been coined so far > would be invalidated as well, because the places =85 well =85 they simply > don=92t fit anymore. > Are you really sure you want to do this? > > Agreed, the gismu we have are not perfect and could have been better. > Not being perfectly parallel is not nice, right. But nothing of all > this is really *serious*. The gismu still work for me. You have to come > up with some better arguments to convince me that the gismu problem is > indeed so serious that we *have to* start over. > > Also you seem to have missed the point of gismu. IIRC, the goal of the > gismu is not to be 100% parallel at all costs, but to simply provide a > base to build new lujvo while *also* being usable on their own. Many > gismu are intentionally vague, which makes it easier to build lujvo > which are more specific. If the gismu would be too specific with their > places, you also would be pretty limited to construct new lujvo. Your > proposal would make many gismu needlessly more specific, not good. > > I think the better way to deal with gismu you don=92t like is to not use > them and to create lujvo or fu'ivla instead. > > > > > Additionally, we would have a few 1-place gismu to collect all the > > gismu bloat - things like "x1 is a standard for x2 (ka?) used by x3", > > "x1 is an epistemology for truths about x2 (du'u) used by x3", or "x1 > > is a condition/mitigating factor/modifier on event x2 (nu?) affecting > > x3". > > > > As for blatantly missing gismu: why is there no word for salty, but > > words for sweet, bitter, sour, and spicy? > > > (bonus points for whoever > > decided to make a lujvo for spicy meaning pain-flavored) > Tell that sarefo. :-) > > > As for blatantly missing gismu: why (=85) > > Why (=85) > > Why not for otter, or > > carrot, or dolphin, or any passerine bird? > Simply because at some point they HAD to stop and it is sheer impossible > to include so many concepts into 1342 words. Especially there are lots > of animals and plants and you simply have to stop at some point there, > too. And not every concept has to be represented in a gismu, that=92s why > there are lujvo and fu'ivla. > Having a small gismu list which does NOT cover everything you can think > of is the point of the gismu list. > > > > > -- > Wuzzy > XMPP: Wuzzy2@jabber.ccc.de > E-Mail: wuzzy2@mail.ru > > -- > 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 > email 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. > > > -- > 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 > email 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. > > > -- > 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 > email 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. > --=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. --20cf307ca5188b532e04edc24f33 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
One of the results of the gismu list is that it helps to org= anize similar concepts together, by number, order, and choice of arguments.= This will (hopefully) make LoCCanX easier to create.=A0
stevo


On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 12:04 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com= > wrote:
1342 word is a short list?! =A0It is too short for some purpo= ses (natural history, I suppose, if kinkajous need a gismu), too long for o= thers (easy memorization, the most obvious) and poorly designed for most ot= her purposes (part of not being about semantic primes, alas). =A0The point = about chaotic places (even given basic meanings) is well founded: the lack = of general positional meaning is a common difficulty for learning the langu= age (see forty years of case proposals -- which, oddly, is not where this p= roposal seems to go). =A0Given the body of existing Lojban text, none of th= is matters, of course, except as another note in the Logjam3 (or 6 or 7 as = it is now): another thing to do better next time.
From: Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 17,= 2013 10:12 AM
Subject: = Re: [lojban] Problems with gismu
=




On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 3:00 PM= , Wuzzy <almikes@aol.com> wrote:
Am Tue, 17 Dec 2013 01:22:51 -0800 (PST)
schrieb lorxus <coronacoreanici@gmail.com>:

> coi ro do
>
> It seems like for a language that prides itself on regularity, ease > of learning and use, and logic, Lojban sure has weird and incomplete > gismu.
>
> A given gismu can have anywhere from 1 to 5 places of varying types, > some of them a sign of gismu bloat, and there are even a few
> extremely obvious gismu with clear counterparts are excluded.
> My
> proposals: first, make all gismu be exactly 3 places long, with the > first an agent, the second a patient, and the third a beneficiary - > loosely. For gismu like {blanu}, we might have "x1 is blue of sha= de
> x2 to observer x3", or something like that; {zdani} might be &quo= t;x1 is a
> house for x2 owned by x3".
I don=92t like your definition of {zdani} because it makes an owner mandatory. If there=92s no owner, it=92s not a {zdani} then. The current =93zdani=94 must not not be neccessarily a house. A =93zdani=94 is a *home*= of
someone.

Yes, zdani =3D se xabju, an inhabi= ted thing or place.

It could also be a bird= =92s nest. So the idea of ownership makes
no sense here. For a building which is a house, see =93zdadi'u=94. This=
also does not include ownership. If you really insist of including
ownership, you could just make another lujvo which includes =93ponse=94. Briefly, your proposed =93zdani=94 is probably too overly specific.

Your idea of forcing exactly 3 places for all gismu would not work for
quite some concepts.
The idea of requiring all gismu to follow a =93agent, patient,
beneficiary=94 convention does not make any sense to me. There are
relationships which simply don=92t fit into this pattern.
First of all, everything which is slightly more abstract is unlikely to
fit into this pattern. Things like addition, subtraction or the logical
AND. Especially =93dilcu=94, which needs the 4th place for the remainder. What=92s with =93klama=94? 3 places. Also I can=92t picture an =93agent, patient, beneficiary=94 relationship for =93klama=94. And, and, and =85
It seems to me that you=92re trying to force a regularity upon concepts

And why does every gismu need an =93agent=94? That=92s highly limiting in m= y
opinion. We have =93gasnu=94 (for example) for that.

<= /div>

One can always use {gau}, {seva'u} although &q= uot;beneficiary" sounds too metaphoric to me and can be talked about i= n the context of N-paradigm, not current "rational" Lojbanic syst= em.

And as I said, ag

But the biggest problem with your proposal is that its impact would be
extreme.
First of all, most, if not all current Lojban writings would be
invalidated.

No if lorxus creates numerous = new gismu with "correct" place structure.
=A0
Also, the regular lujvo which have been coined so far
would be invalidated as well, because the places =85 well =85 they simply don=92t fit anymore.
Are you really sure you want to do this?

Agreed, the gismu we have are not perfect and could have been better.
Not being perfectly parallel is not nice, right. But nothing of all
this is really *serious*. The gismu still work for me. You have to come
up with some better arguments to convince me that the gismu problem is
indeed so serious that we *have to* start over.

Also you seem to have missed the point of gismu. IIRC, the goal of the
gismu is not to be 100% parallel at all costs, but to simply provide a
base to build new lujvo while *also* being usable on their own. Many
gismu are intentionally vague, which makes it easier to build lujvo
which are more specific. If the gismu would be too specific with their
places, you also would be pretty limited to construct new lujvo. Your
proposal would make many gismu needlessly more specific, not good.

I think the better way to deal with gismu you don=92t like is to not use them and to create lujvo or fu'ivla instead.

>
> Additionally, we would have a few 1-place gismu to collect all the
> gismu bloat - things like "x1 is a standard for x2 (ka?) used by = x3",
> "x1 is an epistemology for truths about x2 (du'u) used by x3&= quot;, or "x1
> is a condition/mitigating factor/modifier on event x2 (nu?) affecting<= br> > x3".
>
> As for blatantly missing gismu: why is there no word for salty, but > words for sweet, bitter, sour, and spicy?

> (bonus points for whoever
> decided to make a lujvo for spicy meaning pain-flavored)
Tell that sarefo. :-)

> As for blatantly missing gismu: why (=85)
> Why (=85)
> Why not for otter, or
> carrot, or dolphin, or any passerine bird?
Simply because at some point they HAD to stop and it is sheer impossi= ble
to include so many concepts into 1342 words. Especially there are lots
of animals and plants and you simply have to stop at some point there,
too. And not every concept has to be represented in a gismu, that=92s why there are lujvo and fu'ivla.
Having a small gismu list which does NOT cover everything you can think
of is the point of the gismu list.




--
Wuzzy
XMPP: Wuzzy2@jabber.ccc.de
E-Mail: wuzzy2@mail.ru

--
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_o= ut.

--
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_o= ut.


--
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.

--
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.
--20cf307ca5188b532e04edc24f33--