From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Mar 22 04:58:51 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 22 Mar 2005 04:58:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44) id 1DDiy1-0000l5-B4 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 04:58:41 -0800 Received: from n3a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com ([66.94.237.37]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DDixv-0000k2-Ck for lojban-in@lojban.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 04:58:41 -0800 DomainKey-Signature: Received: from [66.218.69.2] by n3.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Mar 2005 12:57:53 -0000 Received: from [66.218.66.34] by mailer2.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Mar 2005 12:57:53 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-email X-Sender: ben@goertzel.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 14184 invoked from network); 22 Mar 2005 12:57:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167) by m28.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 22 Mar 2005 12:57:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO intelligenesiscorp.com) (208.234.8.229) by mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Mar 2005 12:57:52 -0000 Received: from PICKLEWOMAN (vetta.vettatech.com [200.196.45.33]) by intelligenesiscorp.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id j2MCukn7006536; Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:56:49 -0500 Message-ID: <00be01c52eef$5c772220$7800020a@PICKLEWOMAN> To: , "opi_lauma" References: X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Originating-IP: 208.234.8.229 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0 From: "Ben Goertzel" X-Yahoo-Profile: bgoertzel MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 09:56:41 -0500 Subject: [lojban] Re: "zo'e" = ("unimportant","obvious" and ?"unknown") Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00BB_01C52EC5.72A81420" X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) X-archive-position: 9635 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: ben@goertzel.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list ------=_NextPart_000_00BB_01C52EC5.72A81420 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Opi, I'm a newbie also but I'll try to answer your question, just to test my own= understanding ;-) A Lojban statement is semantically isomorphic to a mathematical predicate f( x_1, ..., x_n) where f is a selbri and the x_i are sumti In this formalism using zo'e is basically equivalent to using a wild-card s= ymbol for one of the x_i For instance, the textbook example mi vecnu zo'e zo'e le rupnu ("I sell something to someone for the dollar") is semantically isomorphic to vecnu( mi, *, *, le rupnu) All zo'e does is to specify that these arguments are not specified. The zo= 'e's are place-holders.=20=20 The choice to use explicit zo'e's instead of rewording using other mechanis= ms is a matter of pragmatics, and emphasis. To me, the above sentence read= s emotionally something like I sell SOMETHING to SOMEONE for a dollar because the choice to include the zo'e's adds a certain emphasis to those u= nfilled arguments, an emphasis that is not present e.g. in the semantically= isomorphic (and generally superior, I suppose) rephrasing mi vecnu fo le rupnu -- Ben G ----- Original Message -----=20 From: opi_lauma=20 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com=20 Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 7:00 AM Subject: [lojban] "zo'e" =3D ("unimportant","obvious" and ?"unknown") Hello, I am new in this group. My name is Opi Lauma. Pleas help me to find answer on my first question. I found that zo'e is unspecified value (used when a sumti is unimportant or obvious). However "unimportant" and "obvious" are different category. Is there a possibility to emphasize whether sumti is "unimportant" or "obvious"? What I need to do if sumti is "unknown", i.e. it is important and not obvious, but "unknown". Can I use "zo'e" in this case? If not, what I need to use? Thank you. To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com=20 Yahoo! Groups Sponsor=20 ADVERTISEMENT =20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20 =20=20=20=20=20=20=20 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/ =20=20=20=20=20=20 b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: lojban-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com =20=20=20=20=20=20 c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service= .=20 ------=_NextPart_000_00BB_01C52EC5.72A81420 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Opi,
 
I'm a newbie also but I'll try to answer your question, just to test my own understanding ;-)
 
A Lojban statement is semantically isomorphic to a mathematical predicate
 
f( x_1, ..., x_n)
 
where f is a selbri and the x_i are sumti
 
In this formalism using zo'e is basically equivalent to using a wild-card symbol for one of the x_i
 
For instance, the textbook example
 
mi vecnu zo'e zo'e le rupnu
 
("I sell something to someone for the dollar")
 
is semantically isomorphic to
 
vecnu( mi, *, *, le rupnu)
 
All zo'e does is to specify that these arguments are not specified.  The zo'e's are place-holders. 
 
The choice to use explicit zo'e's instead of rewording using other mechanisms is a matter of pragmatics, and emphasis.  To me, the above sentence reads emotionally something like
 
I sell SOMETHING to SOMEONE for a dollar
 
because the choice to include the zo'e's adds a certain emphasis to those unfilled arguments, an emphasis that is not present e.g. in the semantically isomorphic (and generally superior, I suppose) rephrasing
 
mi vecnu fo le rupnu
 
-- Ben G
 
----- Original Message -----
From: opi_lauma
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 7:00 AM
Subject: [lojban] "zo'e" = ("unimportant","obvious" and ?"unknown")


Hello,

I am new in this group. My name is Opi Lauma. Pleas help me to find
answer on my first question. I found that zo'e is unspecified value
(used when a sumti is unimportant or obvious). However "unimportant"
and "obvious" are different category. Is there a possibility to
emphasize whether sumti is "unimportant" or "obvious"? What I need to
do if sumti is "unknown", i.e. it is important and not obvious, but
"unknown". Can I use "zo'e" in this case? If not, what I need to use?

Thank you.





To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com




To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here

Yahoo! Groups Links
------=_NextPart_000_00BB_01C52EC5.72A81420--