From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Jan 09 15:02:29 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 09 Jan 2006 15:02:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ew61D-0002tx-0x for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 09 Jan 2006 15:01:39 -0800 Received: from web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.199.118]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ew61B-0002tn-Vu for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 09 Jan 2006 15:01:38 -0800 Received: (qmail 91284 invoked by uid 60001); 9 Jan 2006 23:01:36 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=VKYeiRnjUVTqBw6yffwIZoyq7UqIyw0oqmMkXgg9Zk0zXsRTtfHhQ+NvcGVQOwaIzNlCsQLZL87CWsCKx6HG8siEFeVvPOh1oygd8oEpNgf4Oyw4z6kQ7MaErqNWQFR8xt+BWazlHsrJ7x5EOhPwnnGBYBvnluaJNz+E+p78ioo= ; Message-ID: <20060109230136.91282.qmail@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [70.230.158.161] by web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 09 Jan 2006 15:01:36 PST Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 15:01:36 -0800 (PST) From: John E Clifford Subject: [lojban] Re: cmevla a class of brivla To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <925d17560601091209oe88d19ga9507242b9fccb18@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-archive-position: 11026 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --- Jorge Llambías wrote: > On 1/9/06, John E Clifford > wrote: > > Of course, the uncertainty about > > what {me} means (there are at least three so > far > > today) doesn't help, but anything like it > would > > be subject to similar problems of excessive > > length. > > According to the current baseline (CLL) {me > } > means: x1 is/are among the referents of > "". > > The old (ma'oste) definition was: x1 is > specific to in aspect x2 > > What's the third possibility? The generic sumti to selbri converter, which is very close to the oldest version. So far as I can tell, only the "old" definition is official, though I have seen a lot of (consequently hard to understand) cases of your private version. > > But obviously some device is needed to > > use sumti as predicates, else ambiguity > results. > > In addition to {me } there are {me > moi} and all > the other {me MOI}s that convert a > sumti into a predicate. > > The place structure I use for {me moi} > is > "x1 is/are 's x2 by rule/relationship > x3", which, while not > exactly the same as the old {me }, does > cover a similar > ground. > > I haven't found any uses for the rest of the > MOIs yet. I don't get this; MOI makes various sorts of numerical predicates (ordinal, cardinal, etc.) from number words . I can imagine using other things than PA for these various notions -- kinds of mappings -- but I don't get this general pattern (nor, probably, understand it). How is this ordering anything , i.e., putting something in a place in an ordering. I can get as far as a mapping, but that does not seem to impose an order unless the things mapped from are ordered and (GCH not withstanding) that is not generally the case. Nor does it help here much, since it complicates things even further without clarifying anything. > > Whether it needs to be as complex as it often > now > > is is less clear. In particular, can cmevla > -- > > not whole sumti -- be used directly without > problems? > > Can they be so used with the current gramma? > No. I hardly expected that; the question was how much would allowing it change the grammar. > Could the grammar be modified to allow it? Yes, > trivially. > > Would it cause problems? It depends what you > mean by > "problems". It would require using a {cu} that > is currently > allowed but not required. You'd have to say {la > djan cu klama} > instead of just {la djan klama}. > Probably not a bad habit anyhow. Of course this change does not help with the general problem but probably gets at the most commoon desired usage. To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.