Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0qV3im-000023C; Mon, 1 Aug 94 23:12 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2347; Mon, 01 Aug 94 23:11:01 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 2343; Mon, 1 Aug 1994 23:11:01 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9280; Mon, 1 Aug 1994 22:10:06 +0200 Date: Mon, 1 Aug 1994 13:16:43 EDT Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: gradu is broken X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1692 Lines: 45 la djan cusku di'e > how do we say something like "the meter is the MKS unit of length"? I would express that idea as: le treci'u cu ckilu loi nu clani ci'e la mykysyc It is not a literal translation, because it speaks of scales, rather than the unit, but the idea is the same. > Changing "gradu"'s place structure will allow it to be used to make > new units of measurement, but will eliminate the ability to talk >about< > units of measurement. Since we don't seem to have a clear way of referring to units of measurment anyway, that's not a big loss. How about {le'e mitre} for "the meter"? > ni'o > > I went back to the original article by Scott Layson (TL3/1:70), wherein > the current measurement place structures were proposed, and noted that > he made a suggestion which didn't get taken up into Lojban: an x4 place > for "rupnu", reflecting the date as of which the monetary unit is > meaningful. Note that this is not the same as the date attached to the > entire bridi: > > ca la socinan. le djima be pa xarju cu rupnu > li cinono la merko la zepanan. > simultaneous-with 93-year the price of 1 pig is-in-dollars > the-number 300 by-standard named "U.S." as-of 71-year > In 1993, the price of a pig was US$300 in 1971 dollars. > > I'm not proposing a definite place structure yet, because I don't yet have > a name for this x4 place; I'm looking into what economists call the 1971-ness > of a 1971 dollar. I'm against it. Why not {rupnu fi la merko pe la zepanan}? If the year is important to determine the value of the unit, then it's part of the information that goes in the monetary system slot. Jorge