Return-Path: Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0tMkw7-0000ZUC; Tue, 5 Dec 95 02:08 EET Message-Id: Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id ADFB8F58 ; Tue, 5 Dec 1995 1:08:41 +0100 Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 18:21:39 -0500 Reply-To: "Robert J. Chassell" Sender: Lojban list From: "Robert J. Chassell" Subject: roses and tulips - Lojban/English X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: (plschuerman@ucdavis.edu) Content-Length: 2253 Lines: 71 Peter Schuerman asks: How would one express "that rose is fuzzily 1/pi more pleasant than yonder tulip"? Adapting the example for comparatives shown in the Cowan's abstraction paper, example 4.7, I would write: .i le vi rozgu cu zmadu le va tujli le jei melbi kei li fi'upai This rose is more than that tulip in the truth abstraction of beauty by amount 1/pi Also, suppose someone asks: .i xu go'i Is the preceding utterance true? (The pro-bridi {go'i} repeats the preceding bridi.) I might respond with any one of the following: .i jo'a go'i Yes, there is nothing metalinguistically wrong. .i ju'o go'i Certainly. .i ju'o sai go'i Almost certainly. .i ju'o ru'e go'i Somewhat certainly. .i ju'o xipibi go'i 0.8 certainty. .i la'a xipize go'i 0.7 probabillty. .i je'u ru'e go'i Somewhat truly. I might also say: .i li rau go'i The amount is enough. or .i li mo'a go'i The amount is insufficient. (In this use of {go'i} the {li} expression in the preceding utterance is replaced.) Or I might be more complex; .i li pi xa poi ci'u le li'i me jetnu go'i The amount is 0.6 on the scale of my experience of truth. .i li pi vo poi ci'u le li'i me dirba go'i The amount is 0.4 on the scale of my experience of emotional valuation. This last is short for: .i le vi rozgu cu zmadu le va tujli le jei melbi kei li pi vo poi ci'u le li'i me dirba This rose is more than that tulip in the truth abstraction of beauty by amount 0.4 on the scale of my experience of emotional valuation. This latter utterance OK grammatically, according to the Lojban parser version 2;5;33 --- and as far as I can understand it works as I want: the {poi} links the {ci'u} to the {li}, so it is a `number by my scale', not a `truth abstraction by my scale'. Robert J. Chassell bob@gnu.ai.mit.edu 25 Rattlesnake Mountain Road bob@rattlesnake.com Stockbridge, MA 01262-0693 USA (413) 298-4725