Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [206.241.12.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id NAA13081 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:33:58 -0400 Message-Id: <199608061733.NAA13081@locke.ccil.org> Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (206.241.12.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <12.F8C08C2C@VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:05:06 -0500 Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 09:50:18 -0700 Reply-To: David A Johnston Sender: Lojban list X-UIDL: 839352931.000 From: David A Johnston Subject: Re: male/female, man/woman, human/person X-To: Lojban Mailing list To: John Cowan In-Reply-To: <199608061552.IAA21860@sun.lclark.edu> Status: U X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 2314 X-From-Space-Date: Tue Aug 06 14:02:25 1996 X-From-Space-Address: - > Similarly, tanru of the form "nanmu/ninmu broda" are hard to construe. Just > what > is supposed to be a "male human" or "female human" attribute, beyond the > anatomical? It's too culture-specific. Yes, but this isn't wha I was talking about. I was refering to the difference between the two brivla "ninmu" and "fetpre". Perhaps I've misunderstood what you mean, but attributes don't come into this any more than they do in any brivla. A bridi is the statement of a relationship, and to express that you have to use the words you have. To do _that_, you have to have an agreed upon meaning for those words. > Meaning is a sticky issue that we avoid defining as much as we can, and so > synonymy of predicates is not part of the Lojban definition. How can the definer of a language avoid defining meaning of words? Isn't meaning a fundamental necesity in both speaking and understanding a language? > In addition, "fetpre" may include a female cat that has a personality (to the > speaker), whereas "ninmu" surely excludes such a one. I think the use of > "humanoid" in the place structure is plain waffling.... female chimps? > female ETIs? My understanding is that "prenu" is basically the same word as "person" in English (at least, according to its definition in the dictionary). Saying someone is a person doesn't imply that they are human, true, but it also implies, in my opinion, at least sentience. One might call the inhabitants of a kingdom of intelligent cats the "Cat people", but it would be erroneous to call a normal felis familias a person. Observe: 1. ninmu = woman (humanoid, non-age-specific) 2. fetpre = femal person 3. fetre'a = female human 4. fetsi [similar-to-] remna = female humanoid (sorry about 4 -- I don't know exactly how to say that...) Anyway, my point is this: why do we need gismu that can easily be duplicated by by tanru/lujvo? It seems counter-productive to the goal of an easily learned language. -marvin /*-------------------------------------------------------*/ a(m,W)float m,W;{int e=1;float p,Q,n;p=m;Q=W;while(e++<126) {n=p;p=p*p-Q*Q+m;Q=2*n*Q+W;if((p*p+Q*Q)>=4)return e;}return 0;}main(){float _,E=1.5;while((E-=0.130434783)>-1.5){for(_= (-2);_<1;_+=0.037974684)putchar(a(_,E)+32);putchar('\n');}}