Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2014 09:28:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: TR NS <transfire@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <69a7bca8-d508-4853-9c77-8c33f9624817@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2fE2-HObtXsLynO8uo5nRmbj54sG9SGO_NZuFoJ4W76kg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1a05ebdb-5a99-4382-b6a3-4205d1d16ae6@googlegroups.com>
 <CAO7tK2d=qyqZtckEezU8zdxYVB07661+-gGSLo1YYKDH-MXJ0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <857775fe-c38f-4e84-b3b9-17034a98a989@googlegroups.com>
 <CAKOEKkQjsdhkaQHz2hFhOup9PWhLXMVAYoNS04m=w7w-kBSPew@mail.gmail.com>
 <bdc5c32c-98df-45c9-8c16-210d4c09a9c0@googlegroups.com>
 <036a8ae9-4a0b-455c-b014-0b1a97e37d62@googlegroups.com>
 <20140807124944.GI28465@samsa.fritz.box>
 <1fa41501-809e-4157-aee4-777215596290@googlegroups.com>
 <20140807134047.GK28465@samsa.fritz.box>
 <e86517cd-fb2f-4030-ace9-e16b99b457bc@googlegroups.com>
 <20140807165332.GL28465@samsa.fritz.box>
 <CAOQ8VDUpFrb_FrEqurTZANxfXWKiOtoqgvUAkEa5__w_nHTmqA@mail.gmail.com>
 <bc7b7367-20f2-4bc9-912f-15896c9dc1aa@googlegroups.com>
 <CAO7tK2fE2-HObtXsLynO8uo5nRmbj54sG9SGO_NZuFoJ4W76kg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] CLL Corrections
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_1495_177465950.1407601692161"
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

------=_Part_1495_177465950.1407601692161
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8


On Saturday, August 9, 2014 9:30:15 AM UTC-4, xorxes wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 10:08 AM, TR NS <tran...@gmail.com <javascript:>> 
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>  My "gut" sort of revolts at this ambiguity though --I mean there is no 
>> way to designate a sumti in a sentence while being ambiguous about exactly 
>> which slot it is filling, is there? So it's seems odd to me that one could 
>> do that in a subordinate clause. 
>>
>
> You can do that by placing the sumti in the prenex:
>
>   lo xanto zo'u lo nazbi [be xy] cu clani
>
>   lo xanto noi lo nazbi [be ke'a] cu clani cu mabru
>
>
Not quite what I meant since that still involves a separate clause. Also 
that seems like a sort of unintended consequence of zo'u, the intent of 
which was to be used with da, de etc. So I'm not sure I find its ambiguity 
any less revolting ;-) And actually it's worse in the case of zo'u b/c 
there is no default variable to use, is there? (or that what `xy` is?). At 
least noi has that. 

I suppose the main thing for me, and the reason for my negative gut 
reaction to it, is that I don't find myself wanting to be ambiguous by 
default. If I wanted to be vague, then yeah having something like a little 
word to basically say "eh, you know mean" would be fine. I'd rather be 
explicit about my vagueness then the other way around. It's bad enough that 
people make mistakes, and the listener has to correct based on context. 
Encountering common place "vaguarities" in the language turns me off a bit 
from the reason I am interested in lojban to begin with.

Of course, then again, maybe there is a very good reason that vagueness 
*has* to be the default, which I am failing to see.

Thanks,
.trans.

>

-- 
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.

------=_Part_1495_177465950.1407601692161
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><br>On Saturday, August 9, 2014 9:30:15 AM UTC-4, xorx=
es wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: =
0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div=
><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 10:08 AM, TR NS <spa=
n dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_blank" gdf-obfuscated-=
mailto=3D"LsKwIO0xxbYJ" onmousedown=3D"this.href=3D'javascript:';return tru=
e;" onclick=3D"this.href=3D'javascript:';return true;">tran...@gmail.com</a=
>&gt;</span> wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><br></div></div><div>&nbsp;My "gut" sort of revo=
lts at this ambiguity though --I mean there is no way to designate a sumti =
in a sentence while being ambiguous about exactly which slot it is filling,=
 is there? So it's seems odd to me that one could do that in a subordinate =
clause.&nbsp;</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>You can do that by placing the sumti=
 in the prenex:</div><div><br></div><div>&nbsp; lo xanto zo'u lo nazbi [be =
xy] cu clani</div><div><br></div><div>&nbsp; lo xanto noi lo nazbi [be ke'a=
] cu clani cu mabru</div>
<div><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Not quite=
 what I meant since that still involves a separate clause. Also that seems =
like a sort of unintended consequence of zo'u, the intent of which was to b=
e used with da, de etc. So I'm not sure I find its ambiguity any less revol=
ting ;-) And actually it's worse in the case of zo'u b/c there is no defaul=
t variable to use, is there? (or that what `xy` is?). At least noi has that=
.&nbsp;</div><div><br></div><div>I suppose the main thing for me, and the r=
eason for my negative gut reaction to it, is that I don't find myself wanti=
ng to be ambiguous by default. If I wanted to be vague, then yeah having so=
mething like a little word to basically say "eh, you know mean" would be fi=
ne. I'd rather be explicit about my vagueness then the other way around. It=
's bad enough that people make mistakes, and the listener has to correct ba=
sed on context. Encountering common place "vaguarities" in the language tur=
ns me off a bit from the reason I am interested in lojban to begin with.</d=
iv><div><br></div><div>Of course, then again, maybe there is a very good re=
ason that vagueness *has* to be the default, which I am failing to see.</di=
v><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>.trans.</div><blockquote class=3D"g=
mail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc sol=
id;padding-left: 1ex;">
</blockquote></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">lojban+unsub=
scribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:lojban@googlegroups.=
com">lojban@googlegroups.com</a>.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban">http:=
//groups.google.com/group/lojban</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/d/optout">http=
s://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br />

------=_Part_1495_177465950.1407601692161--