Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from kantti.helsinki.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rHnjH-00007DC; Wed, 14 Dec 94 09:02 EET Received: from fiport.funet.fi (fiport.funet.fi [128.214.109.150]) by kantti.helsinki.fi (8.6.9/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA16180 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 09:02:24 +0200 Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI (MAILER@FINHUTC) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-7 #2494) id <01HKMI8MTPXS00020K@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 07:01:25 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 4553; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 09:02:33 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1844; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 07:59:09 +0100 Date: Wed, 14 Dec 1994 07:01:07 +0000 From: ucleaar Subject: Re: jei In-reply-to: (Your message of Tue, 13 Dec 94 18:53:03 EST.) Sender: Lojban list Reply-to: ucleaar Message-id: <01HKMI8NQ8NM00020K@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> X-Envelope-to: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1857 Lines: 47 Jorge: > > we only have lojei > > short for "loduhu xukau". > {lojei} is not short for {lodu'u xukau}. {tu'a lojei} is "short" for that, > and it is shorter only because jei has one syllable while du'u has two, > not because the expresion itself is any more compact. Good point. "Mi djuno lo jei" is "there is a truth value that I know", not "I know what the truth value is". Even more reason for the severely limited utility of jei. > > I think what I'd actually like to see is an > > intrrogative sumti, "xahu", so we can get "mi djuno xahu mamta do" (I > > know who is your mother). > > But what grammar would it have? There is no current selmaho that would > allow you that form, I think. If "mi djuno xahu mamta be do", xahu could behave like "lohe", "lehe" syntactically. > And that would only work for makau, what > would you do with mokau, xokau, xukau, jikau, etc? Leave them as they are, along with makau. Of these, makau and xukau are the most frequent; I would like to see a briefer version of loduhu xukau as well, but can't see how to do it. > > This wouldn't handle all uses of Q-kau, by any means, but it would > > often afford considerable brevity. Maybe someone more ingenious can think > > of a more general abbreviatory device, but at any rate such would be > > welcome. > > Why do you need to abbreviate? {mi djuno le du'u makau mamta do} is not > unbearably long, just three more syllables than what you propose (which > doesn't really work as it is). And if the du'u phrase is longer, the two > extra syllables just become irrelevant. It's 3 extra syllables and one or two extra degrees of syntactic subordination, which is also some measure of complexity - i.e . [djuno [lo [duhu [broda [makau]]]]] vs. [djuno [xahu [broda]]]. And of course if terminators are required the complexity leads to more syllables. --- And