Message-Id: <m0pUjBz-0000Q9C@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Thu, 10 Feb 1994 15:49:04 EST
Reply-To:     jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
From:         Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: cukta
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 2286
Lines: 64

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.  <unless, over
>         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