Received: from mail-vc0-f189.google.com ([209.85.220.189]:37406) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1Wr6xb-0007Fd-Gg for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Sun, 01 Jun 2014 07:42:19 -0700 Received: by mail-vc0-f189.google.com with SMTP id ik5sf426654vcb.6 for ; Sun, 01 Jun 2014 07:42:01 -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=UFJxgusLB1SnRPfRDMoOrLDSkBNbggv0mszkc8MfYEM=; b=bwNYSXYvK1wZLsd4vaj+P0+gFb41ZTBNjCHNfk7/w2E1z1Kedxpt8xEYZCchKnnACC 3G8/IQ45qIABcdGtM6PG1kU5oMdWVJMm1EzMuzT2JgpGPuFXLW7lX8fyrIUnXg9pt/i1 GZHBChrDBXqQzx3Rg6ipp07xxO+NqdEnHPX0Nm8VZuzbuzuFA8cQsr0K+dS+11/QTdap RI2xh3PDiRopoC3J9gkZxgEuNtJ4ISAHl8jaDyWkSykwNJv1hTIuOHfoy5RNaNDfTZAE wwIeiV44hoZKRdVTL0Cvq92tBbOEfNeH2518BMsMNfCwyQKvUtA8cVqPzUaLGtAvtB/R qsXA== X-Received: by 10.140.101.147 with SMTP id u19mr13316qge.10.1401633721203; Sun, 01 Jun 2014 07:42:01 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.140.31.33 with SMTP id e30ls1812064qge.89.gmail; Sun, 01 Jun 2014 07:42:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.236.159.39 with SMTP id r27mr10236851yhk.7.1401633720742; Sun, 01 Jun 2014 07:42:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ve0-x22f.google.com (mail-ve0-x22f.google.com [2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22f]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id xn6si595411vdc.2.2014.06.01.07.42.00 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 01 Jun 2014 07:42:00 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22f; Received: by mail-ve0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id jw12so4078011veb.6 for ; Sun, 01 Jun 2014 07:42:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.58.30.1 with SMTP id o1mr585664veh.37.1401633720620; Sun, 01 Jun 2014 07:42:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.170.73 with HTTP; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 07:42:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 11:42:00 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Specifying sumti types: another revision of gimste is complete From: =?UTF-8?Q?Jorge_Llamb=C3=ADas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22f as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@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=089e013cbe5e05dc0704fac74825 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --089e013cbe5e05dc0704fac74825 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote: > Before that we need to check if some proposition and property places can > also take events. > It seems to me that properties (i.e. incomplete propositions) are in a sense incompatible with anything else. The only way a property place could also take something else is through overloading. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it means using the same word for two strongly related but different predicates. > E.g. kakne2 was an event place that could lead to an object place (mi > kakne lo bajra) there. Now it's a property place (mi kakne lo ka ce'u du lo > bajra). > And in the opposite direction, some people prefer binxo2 as a property, so that "mi binxo lo bajra" becomes "mi binxo lo ka ce'u bajra". > Propositions can be seen as properties (mi kakne lodu'u lo no'a cu du lo > bajra). What is chosen in this or that place seems to be rather arbitrary > to me. > Incomplete propositions are not complete propositions, but since places for incomplete propositions are normally tied to another place that contains what is required to complete the proposition, then yes, in principle either way could be chosen to define the predicate. This doesn't apply so easily to cases where the property is tied to two places at once though, because there's no immediate proposition that could replace the property. Most predicates with places tagged as "du'u" also have an additional "about" place, which means they could be replaced with property places: "mi djuno lo ka ce'u nelci lo cakla kei do". The problem here is that in these predicates the "about" place comes after the proposition place, and for most property predicates the thing-with-property place comes before the property. So a more natural order would be "mi djuno do lo ka ce'u nelci lo cakla". > So the first step is to clearly separate events vs. > propositions+properties. > An incomplete proposition does not describe an event. A complete proposition can and often does describe an event. If we wanted to, we could easily make do with a single NU for all subordinate clauses, since it's not really necessary to point out explicitly that a proposition describes an event, and we don't strictly need more than "ce'u" to mark an incomplete proposition. So yes, the assignment of ka/du'u/nu to argument places is rather arbitrary. du'u: introduces a complete proposition, unless it contains an explicit ce'u, in which case it introduces an incomplete proposition. ka: introduces an incomplete proposition. It may but need not contain an explicit ce'u, because if not explicit an implicit one is assumed. nu: introduces a complete proposition that describes an event. Same as du'u with respect to ce'u. Some propositions are just too abstract to be said to describe an event e.g. lo du'u li vo sumji li re li re, where or when would that take place? Not really an event. I think "sound" is way too specific to be a type. Something like "living >> organism", or even "container" would have many more instances than "sound". >> And if sance1 and zgike1 are "sound", shouldn't tonga1, voksa1, savru1 and >> rilti1 be as well? >> > > rilti1 or rilti2? Or both? Also sanga2. > I was only looking at the x1 column, but yes, those would seem to be sounds too. > The problem for me is that krixa2, cmoni2 can probably be texts. And text > and sound often go together. > Semantic categorization currently puts them in different classes > (communication, non-linguistic utterances, Music/sound...) > > Can I cusku a selsanga? That's why I wanted "sound" to be a separate type > that could include both sounds and "text". > If a text is anything with linguistic meaning, then some sounds are also text. But there are sounds that are not text, and texts that are not sound. cmoni2 is explicitly described as non-linguistic. > >> mixre >> > > changed to "x1 (object, event) is a mixture including x2 (set of objects > or events)" > > >> /gunma >> > > changed to "x1 (object, event) is a joint mass, team of components that > are x2 (object, event)" > I think those should be "any type". > > >> /kamni >> > > kamni3 is probably a "set". > In my opinion no place should be marked as "set". > rilti is marked as a sequence but again it should be just a group >> > Any example of rilti1? > It's easy to provide vague examples like lo sutra cu rilti lo nau zgike "A fast one is the rhythm of this music." but I guess you want a more specific description like "3/4 is the rhythm of this song". I can already hear the objections, but I think I would go with "li ci fi'u vo cu rilti lo nau zgike". > What is a group according to you? > One that consists of many. E pluribus unum. > porsi1 includes {ce'o} > casnu1 includes {ce} or {jo'u}. > I think porsi1 takes the one (lo gunma) while casnu1 takes the many (lo se gunma). But these are not types in our number/object/event/proposition/property typology. Both the one and the many could be of any of those types. ckilu/sidbo are marked as "(concept)". A sidbo is a du'u, it's something >> that could potentially become a fact. I don't think it needs a special >> type. And ckilu has little to do with concepts, as far as I can tell. >> > > What to fill ckilu1 with if not with {si'o kei}? > I don't exactly know, but I have a lot of difficulty extracting a scale from a proposition. 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. --089e013cbe5e05dc0704fac74825 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

= On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@= gmail.com> wrote:
Before that we need to check if some p= roposition and property places can =C2=A0also take events.

It seems to me tha= t properties (i.e. incomplete propositions) are in a sense incompatible wit= h anything else. The only way a property place could also take something el= se is through overloading. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it m= eans using the same word for two strongly related but different predicates.=
=C2=A0
E.g. kakne2 was an ev= ent place that could lead to an object place (mi kakne lo bajra) there. Now= it's a property place (mi kakne lo ka ce'u du lo bajra).

And in the opposit= e direction, some people prefer binxo2 as a property, so that "mi binx= o lo bajra" becomes "mi binxo lo ka ce'u bajra".
=C2=A0
Propositions can be s= een as properties (mi kakne lodu'u lo no'a cu du lo bajra). What is= chosen in this or that place seems to be rather arbitrary to me.

Incomplete proposi= tions are not complete propositions, but since places for incomplete propos= itions are normally tied to another place that contains what is required to= complete the proposition, then yes, in principle either way could be chose= n to define the predicate. This doesn't apply so easily to cases where = the property is tied to two places at once though, because there's no i= mmediate proposition that could replace the property.

Most predicates with places tagged as "du'u&qu= ot; also have an additional "about" place, which means they could= be replaced with property places: "mi djuno lo ka ce'u nelci lo c= akla kei do". The problem here is that in these predicates the "a= bout" place comes after the proposition place, and for most property p= redicates the thing-with-property place comes before the property. So a mor= e natural order would be "mi djuno do lo ka ce'u nelci lo cakla&qu= ot;.
=C2=A0
So the first step is = to clearly separate events vs. propositions+properties.

An incomplete prop= osition does not describe an event. A complete proposition can and often do= es describe an event. If we wanted to, we could easily make do with a singl= e NU for all subordinate clauses, since it's not really necessary to po= int out explicitly that a proposition describes an event, and we don't = strictly need more than "ce'u" to mark an incomplete proposit= ion. So yes, the assignment of ka/du'u/nu to argument places is rather = arbitrary.

du'u: introduces a complete proposition, unless it = contains an explicit ce'u, in which case it introduces an incomplete pr= oposition.
ka: introduces an incomplete proposition. It may but n= eed not contain an explicit ce'u, because if not explicit an implicit o= ne is assumed.
nu: introduces a complete proposition that describes an event. Same as= du'u with respect to ce'u.

Some propositi= ons are just too abstract to be said to describe an event e.g. lo du'u = li vo sumji li re li re, where or when would that take place? Not really an= event.=C2=A0

I think "sound" is way too specific to be a type. Something like= "living organism", or even "container" would have many= more instances than "sound". And if sance1 and zgike1 are "= sound", shouldn't tonga1, voksa1, savru1 and rilti1 be as well?

rilti1 or rilti2? = Or both? Also sanga2.

I was only looking at the x1 column, but yes, those would seem to be sou= nds too.
=C2=A0
The problem for me is that= krixa2, cmoni2 can probably be texts. And text and sound often go together= .
Semantic categorization currently puts them in different classes (comm= unication, non-linguistic utterances, Music/sound...)

Can I cusku a selsanga? That's why I wanted "s= ound" to be a separate type that could include both sounds and "t= ext".

If a tex= t is anything with linguistic meaning, then some sounds are also text. But = there are sounds that are not text, and texts that are not sound. cmoni2 is= explicitly described as non-linguistic.
=C2=A0

mixre

changed to &= quot;x1 (object, event) is a mixture including x2 (set of objects or events= )"
=C2=A0
=
/gunma =C2=A0

chan= ged to "x1 (object, event) is a joint mass, team of components that ar= e x2 (object, event)"

I think those shou= ld be "any type". =C2=A0
=C2=A0
=C2=A0
/kamni

kamni3 = is probably a "set".
In my opinion no place should be marked as "set".
=C2=A0
=C2=A0rilti is marked as a sequence but again it should be just a grou= p
Any example of rilti1?

=C2=A0It's easy to= provide vague examples like

=C2=A0 =C2=A0lo sutra cu rilti lo nau zgike
= =C2=A0 =C2=A0"A fast one is the rhythm of this music."
=
but I guess you want a more specific description like "= 3/4 is the rhythm of this song". I can already hear the objections, bu= t I think I would go with "li ci fi'u vo cu rilti lo nau zgike&quo= t;.


What is a g= roup according to you?

One that consists of man= y. E pluribus unum.
=C2=A0
porsi1 includes {ce'o}
casnu1 includes {ce} or {jo'u= }.

I think porsi1 t= akes the one (lo gunma) while casnu1 takes the many (lo se gunma). But thes= e are not types in our number/object/event/proposition/property typology. B= oth the one and the many could be of any of those types.
=C2=A0

=
ckilu/sidbo are marked as "(concept)". A sidbo is a du'u, it= 's something that could potentially become a fact. I don't think it= needs a special type. And ckilu has little to do with concepts, as far as = I can tell.=C2=A0

What to fill ckilu= 1 with if not with {si'o kei}?=C2=A0

I don't exactly know, but I have a lot of difficu= lty extracting a scale from a proposition.=C2=A0

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+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.
--089e013cbe5e05dc0704fac74825--