From bruce@brucewebber.com Fri Oct 22 20:31:30 2004
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:31:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp804.mail.sc5.yahoo.com ([66.163.168.183])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.34)
	id 1CLCcN-0006CG-CX
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:30:59 -0700
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.100?) (bwebber000@ameritech.net@67.38.20.153 with plain)
  by smtp804.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Oct 2004 01:44:15 -0000
Message-ID: <4179B6F0.1030707@brucewebber.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:42:08 -0400
From: Bruce Webber <bruce@brucewebber.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:  lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: Help in examples ...
References: <20041022220712.58965.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20041022220712.58965.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
X-archive-position: 8848
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: bruce@brucewebber.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

jordi mas wrote:
 > Bruce Webber wrote:
>>Gismu capture relations.
>>
>>So we could say {klama} is a verb, but {klama} is
>>also part of {le klama}
>>(the traveller), {le se klama} (the destination),
>>etc., which we call
>>nouns. By capturing the relationship of "going", we
>>gain all these
>>additional uses of the same word.
> 
> I like that "capture relations" metaphor. May
> I use it?

Certainly. I'm sure I didn't invent the metaphor, however. I tend to 
think in terms of structure (ordered relations) from my previous studies 
of General Semantics.

> Yes. English verbs capture relations as well.
> We could say "went" is a verb, but it is also 
> part of "the place I went to", "the one who went"
> which we call nouns. Not as terse as in lojban, but it
> manages to capture the relationship of "going" all the
> same.

You're right - English also expresses the relationship. But the 
subject-verb-object structure of English doesn't always work well. 
Lojban can express relationships more generally and thus doesn't have 
that limitation. To me it seems that English (and other European 
languages, I suppose) focus on nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc., where 
Lojban focuses on the relationships between entities. It's a shift of 
perspective.

So equating sumti with nouns and gismu with verbs misses the focus on 
expressing relations.

I think elision (eliding?) might demonstrate the point. Consider

	fo ta cu klama fe le zdani

If I haven't mangled the lojban, this could be translated as "that's the 
way home". (Experienced lojbanists please correct me.) Having a place 
structure for "come/go" allows me to express the idea this way, which is 
a different way of thinking, not just a re-naming of nouns and verbs.

mi'e brus.