Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id QAA05403 for <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 16:15:33 -0400
Message-Id: <199604102015.QAA05403@locke.ccil.org>
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2AA07EF3 ; Wed, 10 Apr 1996 15:16:33 -0500
Date:         Wed, 10 Apr 1996 14:26:14 -0400
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      *kamkuspe
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
Content-Length: 1142
X-From-Space-Date: Fri Apr 19 11:35:07 1996
X-From-Space-Address: -

Steven Belknap:
>>If what you want to say is quantized logic, .e'u use {selka'u logji}
>>"logic of the thing which is quantized". The tanru mechanism takes care
>>of this. If you said {kamkantu logji}, I would take it to mean "logic of
>>the property of being a quant", not "logic with the property of being
>>quantized"
>
>As you point out, the tanru and lujvo mechanisms are somewhat flexible.
>So far, I prefer <kamkuspe> and <kamkantu> to <selkuspe> and <selkantu>.
>I remain unconvinced that these are wrong.  But you use lojban more than
>me.  Is there some compelling reason you see for calling <kamkantu>
>"wrong"?  You haven't explained this yet.

Not "wrong" just "different" - I don't think the logical x1 of the place
structure would be that useful.  A good way to think of "ka" compounds
is to apply the English suffix "-ness".  So selkantu is "quantized"
while kamkantu is "quantumness".  "selkuspe" means
"ranged"/"ranging"/"continuing over a range" and by inference
"continuous" (but I can envision kantykuspe or kuspykantu, for a ranged
set of quanta).  So "kamkuspe" COULD be "fuzziness", but is not merely
"fuzzy".

lojbab