Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 01:07:36 -0500
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject: te frica
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
To: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Reply-to: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Message-id: <01HM6BVC2USI000CNZ@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 4200
Lines: 100

I am not following this discussion for real.  If any of this is
redundant ignore me.   And I can't get into the debate.  So see if
this satisfies, and/or move on with the debate.

> > I can think of redness either as a binary function (or feature), taking
> > values "red" and "non-red" (then the redness of a blue object would be
> > "non-red"), or as a multivalued function with values crimson, vermilion,
> > and what have you. I would probably understand this last one in the
> > sentence "A and B differ in redness", i.e. the function redness()
> > evaluates to something different for A than for B.

I think you might do well to consider all possible sumti types that can
go into x3 of frica, and see if the range of things you might want to
say is covered by the range of possibilities.

Consider (marking a particular lambda variable if you think it
non-obvious - I am presuming that there is an obvious one):

abu frica by lejei xunre

       indicates a difference in red vs. non-red

abu frica by leni xunre

       indicates a difference in degree of redness

abu frica by leka xunre

       indicates a more abstract - less quantitative difference in redness
       perhaps one is maroon and the other has an orangish tinge

abu frica by lenu xunre

       Not an easy application - suggests to me that they might have different
       event contours of being red, that they might be red at different times
       or with different constancies.  In other words, a tense difference.
       This is not a direct understanding based on "nu", but trying to
       describe what seems to be the essential difference in the cases where
       I might consider "lenu" all seem to be differing in tense in some way,
       but this may not be the only kind of difference describable with "lenu"

abu frica by ledu'u xunre

       You might use this instead of lejei, but it doesn't feel like it would
       be as clear.  I would use this to indicate that both are red, but that
       they differ perhaps in that some unspecified non-lambda sumti have
       different values - i.e. they are different relationships of redness

abu frica by lesedu'u xunre

       Someone expressed the fact of A's redness differently than they did B's?

abu frica by leli'i xunre

       They are both red, but A's redness connotes blood, and B's redness
       connotes fire engines.  This connotation might be observer and
       even culture independent, especially in the case of blood, so it is
       not clear that you need to know the observer.

       But if observer Y and observer Z attach differing "experiences" to
       the two rednesses, you might want to note this - I think we put such
       a place on li'i abstracts. ...

       Differences based simply on the fact that the two rednesses are
       being experienced by 2 different people might use ledu'u since there
       is a change in the relation in the non-lambda place, but it is also
       a different experience then as well.  And suppose that A appears
       red to Y and green to Z, and the situation is reversed for B.
       Different experiences of redness.

abu frica by lesu'u xunre

       I don't feel like figuring out which one or more of the above applies.

abu frica by le xunre

       Has nothing to do with redness.  Some specific red thing is relevant to
       either A or B but not to the other, or at least not in the same way.

abu frica by li mu

       They are both identically red, but A is one object/image and B is five
       (or 6?).  But I would rather do this with leka [namcu/kancu or other
       apppropriate number related predicate.

Now the interesting (or troubling) thing is that changing the predicate being
abstracted changes the interpretation, partly because of the typical sumti
that is found there.  Replace "xunre" by "skari" and things get MUCH harder.
REplace by "nanmu" and you may understand meanings of some but not all.
Replace with "cmima" and you get different useful meanings.
Replace with "ckaji" and you start blowing your mind.
Replace with "terfrica" and you finish doing so.

Have fun contemplating
abu frica by leni terfrica
or
abu frica by leli'i terfrica

lojbab