Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of nictytan@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22f as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22f;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <544FB6F3.5010301@gmail.com>
References: <20141018004531.GE20049@gonzales> <CAO7tK2c8JQsr+7zbrdos-9Wm1t8w+sH1SANSO6e_MGV4ZDjcow@mail.gmail.com>
 <20141018180946.GF20049@gonzales> <CAO7tK2dUSzYCWm+CNeNugkeU=aO6mWXSY3gn5dc+8XNU3GpasQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20141018233648.GA29040@gonzales> <CAO7tK2eUqpe3AwAY-DxmONhxM3Pj5kyhTm605bAnD3iJEHVgug@mail.gmail.com>
 <20141021010639.GB11705@gonzales> <CAO7tK2c+ObFDqF_TZTQMjGJRZfZxpoY-pFB4_canWM3Lpdgvsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20141022002214.GD25753@gonzales> <544D68A0.8000402@gmail.com>
 <20141028024248.GB6097@gonzales> <544FB6F3.5010301@gmail.com>
From: Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 14:05:24 -0400
Message-ID: <CAOQ8VDV=j9PDuG=_punh_6+CbMq+A+3RvUjB_atDHexJL1tKwg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: tersmu 0.2
To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" <lojban@googlegroups.com>
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=001a1135ef1ef7f1e205067f7e4c
X-Spam_score: -1.9
X-Spam_score_int: -18
X-Spam_bar: -

--001a1135ef1ef7f1e205067f7e4c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 28 October 2014 11:32, Ilmen <ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I think ultimately using a lookup table would be the best option, so that
> we definitively get rid of sumtcita in the logical form.
>
> Moreover I don't think we can handle all the sumtcita the same way. If
> {broda ba xy} implies {lo nu broda cu balvi xy}, can we infer that {broda
> seka'a mi} implies {lo nu broda cu klama mi}? I don't think so.
>
> A sumtcita =E2=86=94 bridi relative clause conversion table could look li=
ke the
> below:
>
> SE ba X  =3D  xoi ke'a SE balvi X vau
> se pi'o X  =3D  xoi X se pilno fi ke'a vau
> SE ka'a X  =3D  xoi fasnu fa ke'a jo'u lo nu X SE klama vau
> fau X  =3D  xoi fasnu fa ke'a jo'u X vau
> (Here {ke'a} stands for the outer bridi.)
>
> Furthermore, {ba} and {pu} are irregular sumtcita, in that their
> underlying predicate is inversed when they're used with {bo}:
> =E2=80=A2 { brode .ije *ba bo* brodo } =3D { brode .ije *ba* lo nu go'i c=
u brodo }
> (irregular ba/pu sumtcita)
> =E2=80=A2 { brode .ije *ki'u bo* brodo } =3D { brode .ije *se ki'u* lo nu=
 go'i cu
> brodo }  (regular sumtcita)
>

I certainly don't like the idea of having to define the BAI with a lookup
table, but in the current Lojban, it seems unavoidable. If all tags truly
were (simple) bridi operators (I think what you're doing with {ka'a} is a
bit of a cheat) then a lookup table would be unnecessary. If they all would
be true bridi operators, then the definitions (or reductions to xoi) would
be simple, as with {ba} or {gau}.

.i mi'e la tsani mu'o

--=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.

--001a1135ef1ef7f1e205067f7e4c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">On 28 October 2014 11:32, Ilmen <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">ilmen.pokebip@gmai=
l.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gma=
il_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bord=
er-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
 =20
   =20
 =20
  <br><div><span class=3D"">
    </span><span class=3D""></span>I think ultimately using a lookup table =
would be the best option, so
    that we definitively get rid of sumtcita in the logical form.<br>
    <br>
    Moreover I don&#39;t think we can handle all the sumtcita the same way.
    If {broda ba xy} implies {lo nu broda cu balvi xy}, can we infer
    that {broda seka&#39;a mi} implies {lo nu broda cu klama mi}? I don&#39=
;t
    think so.<br>
    <br>
    A sumtcita =E2=86=94 bridi relative clause conversion table could look =
like
    the below:<br>
    <br>
    SE ba X=C2=A0 =3D=C2=A0 xoi ke&#39;a SE balvi X vau<br>
    se pi&#39;o X=C2=A0 =3D=C2=A0 xoi X se pilno fi ke&#39;a vau<br>
    SE ka&#39;a X=C2=A0 =3D=C2=A0 xoi fasnu fa ke&#39;a jo&#39;u lo nu X SE=
 klama vau<br>
    fau X=C2=A0 =3D=C2=A0 xoi fasnu fa ke&#39;a jo&#39;u X vau<br>
    (Here {ke&#39;a} stands for the outer bridi.)<br>
    <br>
    Furthermore, {ba} and {pu} are irregular sumtcita, in that their
    underlying predicate is inversed when they&#39;re used with {bo}:<br>
    =E2=80=A2 { brode .ije <b>ba bo</b> brodo } =3D { brode .ije <b>ba</b> =
lo nu
    go&#39;i cu brodo }=C2=A0 (irregular ba/pu sumtcita)<br>
    =E2=80=A2 { brode .ije <b>ki&#39;u bo</b> brodo } =3D { brode .ije <b>s=
e ki&#39;u</b>
    lo nu go&#39;i cu brodo }=C2=A0 (regular sumtcita)</div></blockquote><d=
iv><br>I certainly don&#39;t like the idea of having to define the BAI with=
 a lookup table, but in the current Lojban, it seems unavoidable. If all ta=
gs truly were (simple) bridi operators (I think what you&#39;re doing with =
{ka&#39;a} is a bit of a cheat) then a lookup table would be unnecessary. I=
f they all would be true bridi operators, then the definitions (or reductio=
ns to xoi) would be simple, as with {ba} or {gau}.<br><br>.i mi&#39;e la ts=
ani mu&#39;o<br></div></div></div></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 />

--001a1135ef1ef7f1e205067f7e4c--