From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:58:48 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 15395 invoked from network); 13 Dec 1996 21:59:54 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 13 Dec 1996 21:59:54 -0000 Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <3.CE7EFC72@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Fri, 13 Dec 1996 22:59:49 +0100 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1996 12:58:34 -0700 Reply-To: Chris A Bogart Sender: Lojban list From: Chris A Bogart Subject: Re: lojban imperfections? X-To: lojban%cuvmb.bitnet@mitvma.mit.edu To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199612131752.KAA14055@indra.com> Content-Length: 1074 Lines: 22 Message-ID: <0cRorhUTYmL.A.E9B.o60kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org> On Fri, 13 Dec 1996, John E. Clifford wrote: > 5. Actually, all the roots (gismu -- we use this as a technical term, so as > not to carry over any freight from other fields that may not fit) are > unambiguous *in Lojban*, but get translated various ways in various > contexts in English or whatever Maybe I'm using terms imprecisely -- I mean that the boundary of kamprenu is not precise -- there are some things for which you can't tell, merely ading the gismu list, if they are a prenu or not. Or tricu, or dunda, or whatever. So when you say "ro le terdunda be mi", (roughly, "all the things given to me") do we include the book that my friend left at my place, and I had the impression he didn't want it anymore, but I'm not really sure if it's mine or his now? I'm not sure if the book is part of loi terdunda, so the phrase is ambiguous -- it could include the book, or it might not, and I don't believe the dictionary definition of dunda is operational enough to clear this up. If it were, I'll wager I could still come up with a similar ambiguity. co'o do'u