From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Wed Aug 05 16:50:46 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:50:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MYqFp-0001dO-9J for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:50:45 -0700 Received: from dsl.zenzebra.mv.com ([207.22.49.29] helo=cmarib.ramside) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MYqFk-0001c6-Pf for lojban-list@lojban.org; Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:50:45 -0700 Received: from cmarib.ramside (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cmarib.ramside (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id n75NoUgF014024 for ; Wed, 5 Aug 2009 23:50:30 GMT Received: (from rusat@localhost) by cmarib.ramside (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id n75NoTOa014021; Wed, 5 Aug 2009 23:50:29 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: cmarib.ramside: rusat set sender to sunrise2000@comcast.net using -f To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: lots of questions References: <5715b9300908051034i61968f38ge2dbbe2e19ebe7fd@mail.gmail.com> <70187c5d0908051058j11e2381cv5e811495129a2728@mail.gmail.com> <5715b9300908051101h11849e55iee38883b44992fb@mail.gmail.com> <70187c5d0908051121l67a0ed8bka5b80af34bd7e5e1@mail.gmail.com> From: sunrise2000@comcast.net Date: 05 Aug 2009 23:50:28 +0000 In-Reply-To: <70187c5d0908051121l67a0ed8bka5b80af34bd7e5e1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <8663d1zupn.fsf@cmarib.ramside> Lines: 25 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 15922 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: sunrise2000@comcast.net Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Jonathan writes: > I think {ko'i goi lo prenu} and {lo prenu goi ko'i} mean roughly the same > thing. See here: > http://www.lojban.org/publications/reference_grammar/chapter7.html#e5d4(Example > 5.4) Agreed. The grammar allows both {ko'i goi lo prenu} and {lo prenu goi ko'i}, and the only real difference is word order. Since {lo prenu} is essentially a constant term (as opposed to {ko'i}, which acts like a variable), it is clear which way the assignment is: {lo prenu} is being assigned to {ko'i}. What gets thorny is when the sumti on BOTH sides of {goi} are members of KOhA, i.e.: {ko'a goi ko'e}. Is this assigning the meaning of {ko'e} to {ko'a}, or assigning the meaning of {ko'a} to {ko'e}? Somewhere on the wiki there's talk about {goi} performing the equivalent of mathematical unification. That makes sense from a logical perspective. It could even be useful for computers that speak Lojban to each other. But, having to keep track of what members of KOhA have been unified with what is probably more than my human brain could handle. It would be nice to have some convention, perhaps involving {ra'o}, to distinguish between unification and simple assignment. 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.