Message-ID: <3135E849.4F23@ccil.org> Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 12:54:17 -0500 From: John Cowan Organization: Lojban Peripheral X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lojban List Subject: Re: Tech: fuzzy: kamkuspe References: <199602291635.LAA13495@locke.ccil.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1552 X-From-Space-Date: Thu Feb 29 12:54:18 1996 X-From-Space-Address: - la xorxes. cusku di'e > I prefer to say that the paint measures so and so on the color scale, > rather than that the color of the paint is such and such number on the > scale. > > The case is analogous to any other measure word in Lojban. Do you say > {le dargu cu mitre li ki'o} = "the road is in meters 1000" or > {le dargu kamymitre cu mitre li ki'o} = "the road length is in meters > 1000"? I think that the first is the correct one, and in any case it is > how usage has proceded. Another example: {mi nanca li reso} = "I am > in years 29" and not "my age is in years 29". > > In other words, the way Lojban handles measurements is to put the object > as the first argument and the number as the second argument, not the > property of the object as the first argument. I think Lojban has to tolerate either form, but clearly the latter case is the predominant one: we have to be able to say both 1) le mi ni condi cu mitre papisore My height is-in-meters 1.82 and 2) le mi ni srukamda'o cu mitre papinomu My diameter is-in-meters 1.05 and clearly 3) mi mitre papisore I am-in-meters 1.82 is merely a shortened form of the previous claim. > (NB: I suppose that the proposed cmavo is fi'u'i, not fiu'i, which must > violate some morphology rule or another. If fiu'i were allowed, how come > that the simple fiu is not?) Correct. (The life of an Authority is hard; my typos become the topics of lengthy discussions, most notoriously "je'a xi" when I meant "ja'a xi".) -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban