Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 13:39:08 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199711141839.NAA10125@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: bob@rattlesnake.com Sender: Lojban list From: bob@MEGALITH.RATTLESNAKE.COM Subject: Re: le/lo X-To: a.rosta@uclan.ac.uk X-cc: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU To: John Cowan In-Reply-To: <9B8E75FB@mail-gw.uclan.ac.uk> (message from And Rosta on Thu, 13 Nov 1997 18:02:06 GMT+0) Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 3776 X-From-Space-Date: Fri Nov 14 13:39:23 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU And Rosta wrote {lo} is intrinsically non-specific and {le} is intrinsically specific. There's no way of using {lo} as specific or {le} as non-specific. ... > Specificity is a sometime side-effect of veridicality. I am baffled as to how you can conclude this. Now there are two of us that are baffled! The issue is how best to translate {le} and {lo} into English when using the short glosses `a' and `the'. One proposal, that I oppose, is always to use `a' for {lo} and `the' for {le}. I am baffled because I cannot see how you fail to see that when translating into the English, it is sometimes (but not always) better to use the word `the' when referring to one object, rather than the word `a'. Consider a `veridicality operator' that is a regular expression search. In a universe with at least one pattern that it finds, it works like {lo}; that is to say, the search finds `one-or-more-of-all-the-things-which-really-match' the pattern. Let the LogFlash cmavo list of 06/01/93, 00968 be our universe: in this cmavo list, a search for {.ua} at the beginning of a line leads to two instances of the class that are veridical -- two instances that match the search pattern. Expressed another way, this `veridicality operator' finds the one or more of those that really are. Also, note that the regular expression search is not specific. (occur "^\\.ua") ==> .uanai UI*1 confusion .ua UI1 discovery However if you change the regular expression search to look for {.ua} at the beginning of a line followed by a space after the letter `a', then only one instance is found. In this case, even though the {lo}-type operator is not specific, it finds just one specific occurrence since there is only one instance of the pattern in the universe. (occur "^\\.ua ") ==> .ua UI1 discovery The issue at hand is how best to translate from the Lojban to the English in this circumstance. In this latter case, is it better style to refer to an instance found, an one pattern "^\\.ua ", or is it better to refer to the instance found, the one pattern "^\\.ua "? If your use of English is at all like mine, you will find that the second translation, using "the", sounds better. This is because the English phrase `an instance' suggests you are dealing with one of a plurality of instances, but `the instance' suggests you are dealing with just one instance. The Lojban {lo} and {le} do not suggest singular or plural, which the English `a' and `the' do. In this case, the Lojban {lo te facki} does not tell you whether there is possibly more than one instance of the regular expression: "^\\.ua ". Context determines whether `the instance discovered' or `an instance discovered' is a better translation into English (when you are using short glosses rather than the longer, more accurate ones). Likewise, of course, {le mlatu} is quite specific, but without more context, you don't know whether to translate the expression as `the cat' or as `the cats'. Again, it is only the context that tells you which short gloss to use when translating into English. Hence, my recommendation that English translators start out by using the long, somewhat unwieldy glosses rather than the short ones. {le} one-or-more-specific-things-which-I-describe-as {lo} one-or-more-of-all-the-things-which-really lo te facki one or more of all the things which really is or are instances discovered le mlatu one or more specific things which I describe as cats -- Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com 25 Rattlesnake Mountain Road bob@ai.mit.edu Stockbridge, MA 01262-0693 USA (413) 298-4725