From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Thu Feb 10 10:49:04 1994 Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Thu, 10 Feb 1994 15:49:01 -0500 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Thu, 10 Feb 1994 15:48:54 -0500 Message-Id: <199402102048.AA12254@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0076; Thu, 10 Feb 94 15:46:00 EST Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 9789; Thu, 10 Feb 94 15:47:45 EDT Date: Thu, 10 Feb 1994 15:49:04 EST Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: cukta To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Status: RO X-Status: Bob and And propose to keep the definition essentially as it is, with a slight change of words. And's version of Bob Chassell's definition: > The new version of the definition looks like this: > > cukta cku book <> x1 is a literary work about > subject/theme/story x2 by author x3 for audience x4 > preserved in medium x5 <> > > [this is a quantity of text, and not the physical object (= > selpapri); however, by default x5 = lo papri. the next years, the usual medium in which books are preserved > changes.> > > x2 may be a convention rather than > a subject]; (cf. cfika, prina, prosa, tcidu, papri) But what does it mean to say: "The Divine Comedy" is a literary work by author Dante preserved in medium paper (or pages, or whatever). It may be true, but it is not an important piece of information about the literary work. The medium may be important if we are referring to a particular copy, but not to the work itself, which may be preserved in many media, and saying so gives next to no information at all. I think the best is lojbab's and Colin's place structure: x1 is the hardcopy x2 is the work x3 is the medium What type of works are included is debatable. Certainly any textual work with a minimum length, (not only written, but could also be spoken/read aloud), probably also pictorial works, again of a certain length (i.e. I wouldn't include a single painting as the x2 of cukta, ?), and I don't know if much else. What I think is important is not to confuse the work with a copy, and that there is justification for a "medium" place only if there is a copy place. The medium is irrelevant to the work itself. The place structure of another gismu might well be x1 is the work x2 is the theme x3 is the author x4 is the audience There are many like this, for more specific types of work than what we call 'book'. e.g. a work of fiction. In this case, there shouldn't be any medium. I prefer the former one for {cukta}, and I don't think this last one is particularly useful, given all the gismu we have for specific types of work, plus {finti} for the more general one. (Of course, {finti} has a function/purpose place, but that's a different subject.) Jorge