From @gate.demon.co.uk,@uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Thu Jun 08 21:49:24 1995 Received: from punt.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3305 ; Thu, 08 Jun 95 21:49:22 BST Received: from punt.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Thu, 08 Jun 95 09:21:59 GMT Received: from gate.demon.co.uk by punt.demon.co.uk id aa05180; 8 Jun 95 10:21 +0100 Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by gate.demon.co.uk id aa18221; 8 Jun 95 2:52 GMT-60:00 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 2651; Wed, 07 Jun 95 21:50:36 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6103; Wed, 7 Jun 1995 21:33:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 1995 20:29:18 EDT Reply-To: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Subject: Re: ni/jei abstractions, fuzzy logic - response to many postings X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander Message-ID: <9506080252.aa18221@gate.demon.co.uk> Status: R > >traji cipni > >mutce cipni > >milxe cipni > >tolmutce cipni > >na'e cipni > > Some things wrong with this scale. I'm not sure what the difference is > between milxe and tolmutce, for one. I see {milxe} more as {normutce}. {tolmutce} is very little. > And you are missing no'e cipni, > which should be somewhere above na'e cipni but not sure where What would that be? For that to make any sense, you would need a scale going from bird to anti-bird, and {no'e cipni} would be the midpoint. If {no'e cipni} makes sense, so does {to'e cipni}. > (and no'e > mutce, which would be somewhere between mutce and tolmutce). It could be added, but I doubt there would be agreement on how it compares with {milxe}. We already disagree on {tolmutce}! (I never said I was giving a complete scale anyway. I'm sure we could come up with many more intermediate extents.) Jorge