From @uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Mon Jun 05 00:07:23 1995 Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3273 ; Mon, 05 Jun 95 00:07:22 BST Received: from punt2.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Mon, 05 Jun 95 22:09:12 GMT Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by punt2.demon.co.uk id aa21483; 5 Jun 95 23:08 +0100 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3237; Mon, 05 Jun 95 18:06:40 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1809; Mon, 5 Jun 1995 17:51:30 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 Jun 1995 17:52:23 -0400 Reply-To: Dylan Thurston Sender: Lojban list From: Dylan Thurston Subject: concise filling of places X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander Message-ID: <9506052308.aa21483@punt2.demon.co.uk> Status: R la lojbab. puza cusku di'e ... > I would never promise that all gismu places could be filled concisely. > Some are present merely to remind us that their existence should be > noted in determining whether a statement is true or not. Thus you > should not claim that "ko'a mluni le toknu" unless you are indeed > asserting that there exist relevant orbital parameters. It isn't > necessary to state them concisely, but it is necessary that there be > some value that could be filled in if someone really cared. I think I misinterpreted the purpose of the gismu list, then. Is it supposed to be a guide for how you hope the language will actually be used? I thought it was the sort of thing that someone will go back in 20 years or so and revise based on what people actually use in practice; but that's not entirely true if there are places that people will never bother to fill. (On the other hand, there might be places used only in descriptions. For instance, jakne x1 is a rocket [vehicle] propelled by jet expelling x2 carrying payload x3 I wouldn't be surprised if {le seljakne} is more common than constructions {da jakne de}.) > lojbab mu'o mi'e. dilyn.