From LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:59:39 2010 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Sat, 16 Jan 1993 04:58:43 -0500 Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3419; Sat, 16 Jan 93 04:57:43 EST Received: from CUVMB.BITNET by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2026; Sat, 16 Jan 93 04:57:25 EST Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1993 04:57:02 -0500 Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: TECH: se, te, & lujvo X-To: ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk X-Cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: RO X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Fri Jan 15 23:57:02 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Message-ID: You cannot assume that seljerna is semantically identical to se jerna, as was pointed out. You have given an example of where the English tanru may be taken more broadly than the English lujvo, even though >I< would never guess at the tanru interpretation without a lot of supporting context. Lojban allows any lujvo to take a more restricted meaning, and seljerna could similarly take a more restricted meaning; it >need< not but it >may<. There is no equivalent mechnaism for the unconverted place, so if you want to restrict jerna, you must to so by providing some modifier that indicates what kind of restriction is intended. Zipf's Law, which Lojbanists may seem to worship, requires us to allow seljerna to be used in lieu of a longer lujvo that is more explicit as to the restriction, because we allow seljerna as a lujvo in the first place, and there is no justification in having the longer form when the short form exists, UNLESS it could carry a somewhat different meaning. We are required to have "sel-" forms in lujvo, because a three-part tanru-based lujvo may depend on using the "se" conversion, and could not be made into a lujvo without a rafsi for "se". Ina ddition, as was also pointed out, in some cases, the two-part lujvo based on "sel-" will be shorter than the tanru, and in this case people will tend, because of Zipf 9so we argue) to use the shorter form. lojbab