Received: from mail-wg0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]:64134) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1Ws4WZ-0006eI-Lh for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:18:18 -0700 Received: by mail-wg0-f61.google.com with SMTP id m15sf705655wgh.16 for ; Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:18:04 -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=yCXFafa4XoxsFGOxqyb1mp2D2Lmf6w+YXarpqXIBbmA=; b=uYCSFZVU95cigIliRLwmudTiPi9BWPrbtVq2w84+0WCF9CYT+MkoIMcy2zMVAyIz3d Ep9KMz8GpjxYn/LaIwSq62pw6UHFpISMdfJucrTqvAnLjHEfIBnyGhUaN4RDcCcQYw98 yBUQRv9xJV4WhSa7HqlE8HPoNXteB6CgOsDHb2BEYMvYlJjoP/DI6AiAcT2SWvzr/B67 YAAJSBKDNMBfF63Ylbb2x3HfV6H1U92eabP3ARy0BuUSP+Pljm+vauQnnr/AJyJGVPqp 7Bh001CwU/60xyqjr8HaBp/JeWHAsaXzWUAmgb2AZL7Cj8xO5EywNeS9QoTSRGK9YqoK 3IUQ== X-Received: by 10.180.208.50 with SMTP id mb18mr3274wic.9.1401862684188; Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:18:04 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.180.107.66 with SMTP id ha2ls208955wib.19.gmail; Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:18:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.14.101.2 with SMTP id a2mr7918eeg.7.1401862683427; Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:18:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-we0-x22b.google.com (mail-we0-x22b.google.com [2a00:1450:400c:c03::22b]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id eh2si419111wib.2.2014.06.03.23.18.03 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:18:03 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c03::22b as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c03::22b; Received: by mail-we0-f171.google.com with SMTP id w62so7988923wes.30 for ; Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:18:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.14.72 with SMTP id n8mr1705256wic.53.1401862683256; Tue, 03 Jun 2014 23:18:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.25.163 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Jun 2014 23:18:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 10:18:03 +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:c03::22b 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=f46d04138a25426d5d04fafc9766 X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - --f46d04138a25426d5d04fafc9766 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2014-06-04 2:40 GMT+04:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas : > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Gleki Arxokuna > wrote: > >> >> 2014-06-03 3:09 GMT+04:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas : >> >>> >>> When you say that casnu1 and simxu1 are "sets", you mean "plural", >>> right? As in "lo ci prenu cu casnu lo cukta", "lo re prenu cu simxu lo = ka >>> ce'u prami ce'u". Or do you mean "set" as in "lo'i"/"lu'i"? Or both? >>> >>> Moving on to the x2's: >>> >>> You also have sets for mixre2, porpi2, spoja2, lanxe2, jbini2, fenso2, >>> konju2, liste2, kampu2, ralju2, lanzu2, bilma2, kancu2, linji2, plita2, >>> sarni2, jinga2 (why?), misno2, natmi2, pesxu2, ransu2, terdi2, gredile2= , >>> kombitu2, vlamei2; >>> >>> That suggests that you do mean "plural" by "set". But then there's >>> cmima2, which shouldn't be a set by that rule. >>> BTW, is there a difference between (set) and (set of any type)? >>> >> >> Well, I'm losing the track of this discussion. What are your suggestions >> on naming those places? >> > > It depends on what the goal is. > I want a gimste that would teach 1. te sumti interactions 2. what type can go into each place. 3. how plurality is formed inside each place if applicable. If you can see other goals (like e.g. improving semantic categorization) you are free to add new columns or ask me if it requires some automation. Are we just specifying types for each argument place, or something else > besides types? You started by saying you were specifying mutually > incompatible types. For this, the first thing to do is to list all the > possible types, so we know what we have to choose from. "Mutually > incompatible" is realatively easy to achieve for the more abstract types > (proposition, property, relation, number), but for the more concrete type= s > (event, sound, text, object) it is not always so easy to see them as > mutually incompatible, since there's a lot of overlap. > > Another difficulty is that many of the specifications (usually inherited > from the official gimste) are not about permanent types at all, but eithe= r > about roles (agent, patient, instrument, observer, place, medium) or abou= t > distributivity ("set", "mass", "individual"). I put those in scare quotes > because there isn't even an agreed definition for what they mean, so usin= g > them to explain something else is always risky. > > > >> Of course I can change all of them to just "object". Still I wish a >> formalized explanation was given for each place of what connective to >> choose. E.g. using {jo'u} for porsi1 would be strange. >> > > It all depends on how you use it. Since "porsi" can just as easily mean > "are sequences" as "is a sequence", there shouldn't be a problem in using= a > plural sumti formed with "jo'u" in x1. You just have to know that "jo'u" > doesn't create an emergent single thing like ce/ce'o (and "joi" with some > of its definitions) do. > Out of {ce'o}, {jo'u}, {joi} casnu1 can accept {jo'u} but not {ce'o}, porsi1 can accept {ce'o} but not {jo'u} (unless that jo'u connect sumti then connected with {ce'o} again, right? This is what I also want to reflect in the gimste. > The important thing for porsi1 is that it has to be something that > consists of other things, so that it can make sense to say that those oth= er > things are in some order. But "something that consists of other things" i= s > not a type, at least not a type in the above typology, because all the > concrete types there can consist of other things, and probably most of th= e > abstract types too. If we make "set" another abstract type, and the only > type allowed for porsi1, then we connot say such elementary things as "mi > viska lo porsi be (fi) lo manti" because abstract sets are not the type o= f > thing that can be seen. > > Most of the places marked as "set" are usually plural and > non-distributive, i.e. it doesn't make much sense to fill them with a sum= ti > that refers to only one thing, and when filled by a sumti that refers to > more than one thing you cannot distribute the predication for each of the > things, it applies to all of them together. But that's independent of the > type of the things. > If I define porsi1 as "x1 (any type; {ce'o} for showing sequence)" casnu1 as just "x1 (any type)" gunma as "x1 (any type; {joi} for showing mass)" would it be okay? > To sum up: "type", "role" and "distributivity" are three different and > mostly independent properties of argument places. > > (observer) is not a type in the same sense that >>> proposition/property/number/etc are types. >>> >> >> Okay I can change that from "x3 (observer)" to ''observer x3 (object)". >> > > That works for me. One problem with the word "object" though is that > sometimes it includes, but sometimes it is used in contrast with, sentien= t > beings. I guess this should be clarified somewhere. These "objects" will > almost always be people. > If you have a better term than "object"... > > > >> {cinza} is not a body part. They are tweezers. >> > > Hmm, right, it's mainly a tool: > > "x1 is a/are tong(s)/chopsticks/pincers/tweezers/pliers [tool/body-part] > for x2 to pinch x3" > > But it doesn't describe an action. "ko'a ca'a cinza ko'e ko'i" doesn't > mean that ko'i actually gets pinched, just that ko'a actually is for > pinching ko'i. If "cinza" was an action, the expected definition for me > would be "x1 pinches x2 with x3 (at locus x4)". So I don't think x2 is an > agent. I can see how x3 fits with the tool definition, but I don't really > see why there is an x2 at all though, other than to make it a body part.. > > > >> One last question. >> nelci - x1 is fond of/likes/has a taste for x2 (object/state). >> >> Can we say: >> mi nelci lo plise >> mi nelci lo nu do limna >> > > I have no problem with those two. > > >> mi nelci lo ka limna >> > > I can accept this one, but to me it entails a separate meaning for "nelci= " > if it is to mean that I like to swim, as opposed to just liking the > abstract property of being a swimmer: > If it is to mean "I like to swim" then the place would be "x2 (any type, property of x1)" > >> mi nelci li mu >> ? >> > > And that's why you always bet on it when playing roulette? > > 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. --f46d04138a25426d5d04fafc9766 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



2014-06-04 2:40 GMT+04:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <= ;jjllambias@gmail= .com>:

On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Gleki Arxokuna <g= leki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:

2014-06-03 3:09 GMT+04:00 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <jjllambias@gmail.com= >:

When you say that casnu1 and sim= xu1 are "sets", you mean "plural", right? As in "l= o ci prenu cu casnu lo cukta", "lo re prenu cu simxu lo ka ce'= ;u prami ce'u". Or do you mean "set" as in "lo'= i"/"lu'i"? Or both?

Moving on to the x2's:

You= also have sets for mixre2, porpi2, spoja2, lanxe2, jbini2, fenso2, konju2,= liste2, kampu2, ralju2, lanzu2, bilma2, kancu2, linji2, plita2, sarni2, ji= nga2 (why?), misno2, natmi2, pesxu2, ransu2, terdi2, gredile2, kombitu2, vl= amei2;

That suggests that you do mean "plural" by &q= uot;set". But then there's cmima2, which shouldn't be a set by= that rule.
BTW, is there a difference between (set) and (set of = any type)?=C2=A0

Well, I'm losing the track of this discussion. What are your= suggestions on naming those places?

It depends on what the goal is.
I want a gimste that would teach 1. te sumti interactions 2. w= hat type can go into each place. 3. how plurality is formed inside each pla= ce if applicable.

If you can see other goals (like e.g. improving s= emantic categorization) you are free to add new columns or ask me if it req= uires some automation.


Are we just specifying types for each argument place, or something else b= esides types? You started by saying you were specifying mutually incompatib= le types. For this, the first thing to do is to list all the possible types= , so we know what we have to choose from. "Mutually incompatible"= is realatively easy to achieve for the more abstract types (proposition, p= roperty, relation, number), but for the more concrete types (event, sound, = text, object) it is not always so easy to see them as mutually incompatible= , since there's a lot of overlap. =C2=A0=C2=A0

Another difficulty is that many of the specifications (= usually inherited from the official gimste) are not about permanent types a= t all, but either about roles (agent, patient, instrument, observer, place,= medium) or about distributivity ("set", "mass", "= individual"). I put those in scare quotes because there isn't even= an agreed definition for what they mean, so using them to explain somethin= g else is always risky.

=C2=A0
Of course I can change all of them to just = "object". =C2=A0Still I wish a formalized explanation was given f= or each place of what connective to choose. E.g. using {jo'u} for porsi= 1 would be strange.

It all depends on = how you use it. Since "porsi" can just as easily mean "are s= equences" as "is a sequence", there shouldn't be a probl= em in using a plural sumti formed with "jo'u" in x1. You just= have to know that "jo'u" doesn't create an emergent sing= le thing like ce/ce'o (and "joi" with some of its definitions= ) do.

Out of {ce'o}, {jo&#= 39;u}, {joi} casnu1 can accept {jo'u} but not {ce'o}, porsi1 can ac= cept {ce'o} but not {jo'u} (unless that jo'u connect sumti then= connected with {ce'o} again, right?

This is what I also want to reflect in the gimste.


The important thing for porsi1 is that it has to be som= ething that consists of other things, so that it can make sense to say that= those other things are in some order. But "something that consists of= other things" is not a type, at least not a type in the above typolog= y, because all the concrete types there can consist of other things, and pr= obably most of the abstract types too. If we make "set" another a= bstract type, and the only type allowed for porsi1, then we connot say such= elementary things as "mi viska lo porsi be (fi) lo manti" becaus= e abstract sets are not the type of thing that can be seen.=C2=A0

Most of the places marked as "set" are usuall= y plural and non-distributive, i.e. it doesn't make much sense to fill = them with a sumti that refers to only one thing, and when filled by a sumti= that refers to more than one thing you cannot distribute the predication f= or each of the things, it applies to all of them together. But that's i= ndependent of the type of the things.

If I define
porsi1 as= "x1 (any type; {ce'o} for showing sequence)"
casnu1 as ju= st "x1 (any type)"
gunma as=C2=A0"x1 (any type; {j= oi} for showing mass)"
would it be okay?


To sum up: "type", "role" and "= ;distributivity" are three different and mostly independent properties= of argument places.=C2=A0

(observer) is not a type in the same sense that proposition/property/numbe= r/etc are types.

Okay I can change that from "x3 (observer)" to &= #39;'observer x3 (object)".

That works for me. One problem with the word "= object" though is that sometimes it includes, but sometimes it is used= in contrast with, sentient beings. I guess this should be clarified somewh= ere. These "objects" will almost always be people.
If you have a better term than "ob= ject"...
=C2=A0
=C2=A0
=C2=A0
=C2=A0 {cinza} is not a body part. The= y are tweezers.

Hmm, right, it's mainly a tool:

=C2=A0"x1 is a/are tong(s)/chopsticks= /pincers/tweezers/pliers=C2=A0[tool= /body-part] for x2 to pinch x3"

But it doesn't descr= ibe an action. "ko'a ca'a cinza ko'e ko'i" doesn&= #39;t mean that ko'i actually gets pinched, just that ko'a actually= is for pinching ko'i. If "cinza" was an action, the expected= definition for me would be "x1 pinches x2 with x3 (at locus x4)"= . So I don't think x2 is an agent. I can see how x3 fits with the tool = definition, but I don't really see why there is an x2 at all though, ot= her than to make it a body part..

=C2=A0
One last question.
nelci - x1 is fond of/likes/has a taste for x2 (object/state).

Can we say:
mi nelci lo plise
mi nelci lo nu do limna

I have no problem with those two.
=C2=A0
mi nelci lo ka limna

I can accept this one, but to me it entails a separate meaning for= "nelci" if it is to mean that I like to swim, as opposed to just= liking the abstract property of being a swimmer:

If it is to mean "I= like to swim" then the place would be
"x2 (any type, p= roperty of x1)"

=C2=A0
mi nelci li mu
?
<= /div>
And that's why you always bet= on it when playing roulette?

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.
--f46d04138a25426d5d04fafc9766--