Received: from mail-la0-f56.google.com ([209.85.215.56]:36735) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1Wqka6-00031O-2R for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sat, 31 May 2014 07:48:29 -0700 Received: by mail-la0-f56.google.com with SMTP id mc6sf295063lab.1 for ; Sat, 31 May 2014 07:48:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from: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=k9zlh7w15+2ukQlAWTYGb8E5/jrTKbYv87JKT7yfHfg=; b=oN8vDvth2bFHxVley5ivDUUKzniWMXCj31eK1TxmBPah7VnwD/gtIW/Jv5/Ka+xL8D bR6/pB2dQBv99bUDYVH2xXaQL53Ov/RFM1omDhBViQa3EMvwZ+U2n3DEPbZlhaA7BCO4 +KfqFXPEPc1p6R4pJWyyXwdlnEmhq5B5Ip8HqxvX8TMVpqiOObkEkvh5fH6CGwTc++C8 QA5j6U5eawuok6kzFKZEL20/0r/VUKq7qBqeKqrU9Nt/uWxFTmSzS5o0umFnODN8Xfx4 8vwqnWfL4M07RcURz2dKJkRZvgBhcNzezyB25WtwXZ/iDLdyH40KrAkNJ4oQGNLggJDL tebQ== X-Received: by 10.152.37.200 with SMTP id a8mr2735lak.19.1401547694428; Sat, 31 May 2014 07:48:14 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.152.27.41 with SMTP id q9ls252408lag.76.gmail; Sat, 31 May 2014 07:48:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.112.118.76 with SMTP id kk12mr37846lbb.16.1401547693586; Sat, 31 May 2014 07:48:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x231.google.com (mail-wi0-x231.google.com [2a00:1450:400c:c05::231]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q13si236956wiw.1.2014.05.31.07.48.13 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 31 May 2014 07:48:13 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::231 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c05::231; Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id f8so2460498wiw.16 for ; Sat, 31 May 2014 07:48:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.248.130 with SMTP id ym2mr33325372wjc.88.1401547693435; Sat, 31 May 2014 07:48:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.25.163 with HTTP; Sat, 31 May 2014 07:48:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 18:48:13 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Specifying sumti types: another revision of gimste is complete From: Gleki Arxokuna To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c05::231 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=gleki.is.my.name@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=089e013d144267312104fab34037 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --089e013d144267312104fab34037 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2014-05-31 18:27 GMT+04:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas : > > > > On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 4:02 AM, Gleki Arxokuna < > gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I added my semantic categorization to the sheet. It was created long lon= g >> ago and wasn't meant to be used with tesumti interactions table. So in c= ase >> there are inconsistencies you are free to correct it. >> >> Also filters are now shown in column headers so you can quickly show onl= y >> rows with necessary values in a chosen column. >> > > That's useful. You have 7 gismu that don't start the x2 column with "x2", > 8 that don't start the x3 column with "x3", 2 for x4 and 1 for x5. > I will check them when others leave the sheet so that I can make corrections without disturbing anyone. > I still see issues on gismu with properties. For example, "jibni" has x2 >>> (same type as x1), but "darno" has x2 (object). I agree that the x2 has= to >>> be of the same type as x1 in these but then objects and events must sha= re >>> the same type (spatio-temporal entities), since events can be close to >>> objects in position. >>> >> >> Two options: >> 1. Split the definition into: >> "x1 (event,object) is near or close to x2 (event, object) in x3 >> (property); x1 (number, abstraction) is near or close to x2 (same type a= s >> x1) in x3 (property)" >> >> This will quickly make definitions bulky. On the other hand there are no= t >> so many space gismu. >> >> 2. Make objects and events one type which will lead to {lo mlatu ka'e >> fasnu}. >> >> Any other ideas? >> > > I don't have an issue with "lo mlatu ka'e fasnu". We don't usually think > of living things as "happening", especially since we have the more specif= ic > "jmive" for them, But in any case, I'm now not happy with "same type as" > for comparatives. I realized that anything can be compared with anything > else if you just choose the right property for comparison. For instance: > > li ci zmadu lo sfofa lo ka mi'o xo kau casnu ce'u > "The number three exceeds sofas in how many times we discuss them". > Yes, there are already similar places in other gismu that dont interact with "same type as..." way. > Since there are properties that can easily accomodate any type (such as > "lo ka ce'u se casnu") then x1 and x2 are not really restricted to one of > the types of the number/object-event/proposition/property/relation/... > typology. It's really the property x3 that fixes the type of x1 and x2 so > I'd say: "x1 is near or close to x2 in x3 (property of x1 and x2)". > > Notice that "(property of x1 and x2}" is not the same as "{relation > between x1 and x2}", which is required by something like "ckini". > Properties have a single open argument and relations have (at least) two, > You mean that e.g. bruna3 has one ce'u that is equally applied to bruna1 and bruna2 whereas ckini3 and simxu2 have two ce'u inside? Note taken. > Is the x2 of porsi an assertion, or should it be a (transitive, >>> antisymmetric, total) binary relation? I think "porsi" works something = like >>> "li pa ce'o li re ce'o li ci cu porsi lo ka ce'u mleca ce'u" >>> >> It doesn't contradict that porsi2 is an assertion since {ka} is a >> subclass of {du'u} but I added your example to the sheet (very last >> columns) until a better glossing of this place is found. >> > > If "property" is a subclass of "assertion" (I'd prefer "proposition") > "assertion" was chosen because it has higher frequency in English. Don't forget that this is to be meant "Simple English gimste" (it is still part of "teach simple lojban" project) although we can have any number of columns for developers. then they don't belong in the same level of the typology. Shouldn't the > types be mutually exclusive? > "assertion" is du'u. property is {ka}. Isn't {ka} the same as {du'u} but with at least one ce'u inside? [See http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=3Dka,_du%27u,_si%27o,_ce%27u,_zo%27e] > > For mupli you have "x2 (property of x2)". mupli/fadni/traji/cnano/rirci >>> should have the same for x3, and it should be the same type as x1 (a gr= oup >>> of that type). If you have x3 as a set, then property x2 is not a prope= rty >>> of x3, but a property of the members of x3. >>> >> >> Fixed. I moved all of them to "General =3D>Set structure" class, however= , >> steci should probably also belong to them. >> as well as some other gismu from "Groups & parts" class. >> > > "selte'i" does belong to the same class. Unfortunately "steci" has x1 and > x2 reversed. > > >> For future considerations: "General comparisons" class might also >> intersect with them and thus needs rearranging. >> > > I think place order is relevant. (thing-with-property, > thing-with-property, property), e.g. "zmadu", (thing-with-property, > property, thing-with-property), e.g. "mupli". and (property, > thing-with-property, thing-with-property), e.g. "steci" (the only one?) a= re > three different classes, although clearly they can all be grouped in one > superclass. > Let's not mix "klesi" and "structure" columns then. "klesi" is about semantics, "structure" is about interaction of places and variable type declaration. Further development and evolution will give those columns more precise definitions. > mu'o mi'e xorxes > > -- > 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/d/optout. > --=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/d/optout. --089e013d144267312104fab34037 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



2014-05-31 18:27 GMT+04:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas &l= t;jjllambias@gmai= l.com>:



On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 4:02 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:
I added my sem= antic categorization to the sheet. It was created long long ago and wasn= 9;t meant to be used with tesumti interactions table. So in case there are = inconsistencies you are free to correct it.

Also filter= s are now shown in column headers so you can quickly show only rows with ne= cessary values in a chosen column.

That's useful. You have 7 gismu that don't start th= e x2 column with "x2", 8 that don't start the x3 column with = "x3", 2 for x4 and 1 for x5.

I will check them when others leave the sheet so that I= can make corrections without disturbing anyone.


I still see issues on gismu with properties. For example, "jibni"= ; has x2 (same type as x1), but "darno" has x2 (object). I agree = that the x2 has to be of the same type as x1 in these but then objects and = events must share the same type (spatio-temporal entities), since events ca= n be close to objects in position.

Two options:
=
1. Split the definition into:
"x1 (event,object) is near or c= lose to x2 (event, object) in x3 (property);=C2=A0x1 (number, abstraction) = is near or close to x2 (same type as x1) in x3 (property)"

This will quickly make definitions bulky. On the other = hand there are not so many space gismu.

2. Make ob= jects and events one type which will lead to {lo mlatu ka'e fasnu}.

Any other ideas?

I don't have an issue with "lo mlatu ka= 9;e fasnu". We don't usually think of living things as "happe= ning", especially since we have the more specific "jmive" fo= r them, But in any case, I'm now not happy with "same type as"= ; for comparatives. I realized that anything can be compared with anything = else if you just choose the right property for comparison. For instance:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 li ci zmadu lo sfofa lo ka mi'o xo ka= u casnu ce'u
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 "The number three exceeds sof= as in how many times we discuss them".

Yes, there are already similar places in other gismu that dont interac= t with "same type as..." way.


Since there are properties that can easily accomodate any t= ype (such as "lo ka ce'u se casnu") then x1 and x2 are not re= ally restricted to one of the types of the number/object-event/proposition/= property/relation/... typology. It's really the property x3 that fixes = the type of x1 and x2 so I'd say: "x1 is near or close to x2 in x3= (property of x1 and x2)".

Notice that "(property of x1 and x2}" is not = the same as "{relation between x1 and x2}", which is required by = something like "ckini". Properties have a single open argument an= d relations have (at least) two,

You mean that e.g. bruna= 3 has one ce'u that is equally applied to bruna1 and bruna2 whereas cki= ni3 and simxu2 have two ce'u inside?

Note take= n.


Is the x2 of porsi an assertion, or should it be a (transitive, antisy= mmetric, total) binary relation? I think "porsi" works something = like "li pa ce'o li re ce'o li ci cu porsi lo ka ce'u mlec= a ce'u"=C2=A0
It doesn't contradict that po= rsi2 is an assertion since {ka} is a subclass of {du'u} but I added you= r example to the sheet (very last columns) until a better glossing of this = place is found.

If "property&= quot; is a subclass of "assertion" (I'd prefer "proposit= ion")

"as= sertion" was chosen because it has higher frequency in English. Don= 9;t forget that this is to be meant "Simple English gimste" (it i= s still part of "teach simple lojban" project) although we can ha= ve any number of columns for developers.

then they don't belong in the same level of the typology. Shouldn= 't the types be mutually exclusive? =C2=A0

"assertion" is du'u. property is = {ka}. Isn't {ka} =C2=A0the same as {du'u} but with at least one ce&= #39;u inside? [See http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=3Dka,_du= %27u,_si%27o,_ce%27u,_zo%27e]

For mupli you have "x2 (property of x= 2)". mupli/fadni/traji/cnano/rirci= should have the same for x3, and it should be the same type as x1 (a group= of that type). If you have x3 as a set, then property x2 is not a property= of x3, but a property of the members of x3.=C2=A0

Fixed. I moved all of them to= "General =3D>Set structure" class, however, steci should prob= ably also belong to them.
as well as some other gismu from "= Groups & parts" class.

"selte&= #39;i" does belong to the same class. Unfortunately "steci" = has x1 and x2 reversed.
=C2=A0
For future considerations: "General comparisons" class might als= o intersect with them and thus needs rearranging.

I think place order is relevant. (th= ing-with-property, thing-with-property, property), e.g. "zmadu", = =C2=A0(thing-with-property, property, thing-with-property), =C2=A0e.g. &quo= t;mupli". and (property, thing-with-property, thing-with-property), e.= g. "steci" (the only one?) are three different classes, although = clearly they can all be grouped in one superclass. =C2=A0

Let's not mix "= klesi" =C2=A0and "structure" columns then. "klesi"= is about semantics, "structure" is about interaction of places a= nd variable type declaration.

Further development and evolution will give those colum= ns more precise definitions.


mu'o mi'e xorxes

--
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/d/optout.

--
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+unsub= scribe@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 http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--089e013d144267312104fab34037--