From pycyn@aol.com Mon Apr 16 13:39:44 2001
Return-Path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 16 Apr 2001 20:39:44 -0000
Received: (qmail 31167 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2001 20:39:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Apr 2001 20:39:44 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r12.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.66) by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Apr 2001 20:39:44 -0000
Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r12.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.14.) id r.14.12a0da6c (2522) for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Mon, 16 Apr 2001 16:39:13 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <14.12a0da6c.280cb270@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2001 16:39:12 EDT
Subject: Re: Three (4) more questions
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type:  multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_14.12a0da6c.280cb270_boundary"
Content-Disposition:  Inline
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519
From: pycyn@aol.com
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 6592

           
--part1_14.12a0da6c.280cb270_boundary 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In a message dated 4/16/2001 9:23:45 AM Central Daylight Time,=20
biomass@hobbiton.org writes:



> Without using sets, how can "There are many rats" be said? (The book=20
> says it as <le'i ratcu cu barda
>=20


Literally, {so'i da ratcu}

<As I understand lujvo, any lujvo may be defined *W/O* tanru, using be=20
and poi/voi (or je) [assuming that <lo broda je brode> is the same as=20
<lo broda poi brode>, and <le broda je brode> is the same as <le broda=20
voi brode>.

This looks inherently implausible, since many lujvo (from many tanru, indee=
d)=20
are not genus-species (class-subclass) types. =A0A goodly number are pullin=
g up=20
later arguments (and, indeed, subject raised later arguments), for example.=
=20
=A0Therein lies at least one source of the semantic ambiguity of class. =A0=
Even=20
within your limits, however, there is the difference between {poi} and {voi=
}=20
({je} won't enter much because of the inaccuracy it introduces -- a big mou=
se=20
is not both a mouse and big, after all).
A shelled insect might be {cakcinki} in the {cinki poi se calku} sense, but=
 a=20
beetle is {cinki VOI se calku} -- the definer's choice and to Hell with=20
anything other than is convenience.

<Why does the dictionary have an English gloss (which as I see it is=20
meaningless many times [for example brabloti =3D ship (?!)]), but not=20
the 'long' version of the lujvo, using poi and be? This would be=20
a 'real' definition, which can include the entire place structure.>

A fair question and a good suggestion, if you'd like to carry it out. =A0Bu=
t it=20
would not always clarify matters completely and the English gloss often doe=
s=20
(ship is a big boat -- big enough to carry other boats). Making the=20
constructor think the long form through might make for better lujvo, too.

Since tanru are (very) semantically ambiguous, how can we allow=20
ourselves to define language concepts using tanru (e.g. <sumti tcita>,=20
<se steci srana>, etc? Those would mean extremely 'wide' concepts!>

Language concepts are extremely wide too. =A0And the narrow definition is i=
n=20
the grammar.


<Why the hell does <brivla> mean what it means? How do the two terms=20
connect, and why would it mean only one word? What's the real=20
difference between a brivla and a selbri, then? I mean, <nu prenu kei>=20
is lo valsi, isn't it?>

Skipping a long story of sloppy communication and mutual misunderstandings=
=20
and misapplied technical terms (in short, the history of Loglan/Lojban=20
technical terminology), this is a hard one to answer -- and the tale is too=
=20
long for even a face-to-face. =A0And it is probably too late to try to do i=
t=20
all over again right, but a brief attempt may be ok. =A0{bridi} means=20
"predication," a predicate-centered construction that can be asserted,=20
questioned, applied as a description and so on. =A0At the center of a=20
predication is, obviously, a predicate, which may be expressed in one or=20
several words and with a variety of auxiliary devices. =A0A one-word predic=
ate=20
is a brivla (actually, as the list notes, a selbrivla) and it keeps that=20
status even when it is combined into a more complex predicate in a=20
predication. =A0The predicate of a predication is (automatically) a selbri,=
=20
whatever it is made up of -- one word, several in an unmarked structure, or=
=20
in a structure of whatever complexity. And no, {nu prenu kei} is not a vals=
i=20
but a valsi porsi (porsi lo valsi). =A0It is a potential selbri, though not=
 a=20
functional one as given, but it is not a brivla, since not a valsi.

           
--part1_14.12a0da6c.280cb270_boundary 
Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR=3D"#ffffff"><FONT  SIZE=3D=
2>In a message dated 4/16/2001 9:23:45 AM Central Daylight Time,=20
<BR>biomass@hobbiton.org writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR><BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN=
-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Without using sets, how c=
an "There are many rats" be said? (The book=20
<BR>says it as &lt;le'i ratcu cu barda
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>Literally, {so'i da ratcu}
<BR>
<BR>&lt;As I understand lujvo, any lujvo may be defined *W/O* tanru, using =
be=20
<BR>and poi/voi (or je) [assuming that &lt;lo broda je brode&gt; is the sam=
e as=20
<BR>&lt;lo broda poi brode&gt;, and &lt;le broda je brode&gt; is the same a=
s &lt;le broda=20
<BR>voi brode&gt;.
<BR>
<BR>This looks inherently implausible, since many lujvo (from many tanru, i=
ndeed)=20
<BR>are not genus-species (class-subclass) types. =A0A goodly number are pu=
lling up=20
<BR>later arguments (and, indeed, subject raised later arguments), for exam=
ple.=20
<BR>=A0Therein lies at least one source of the semantic ambiguity of class.=
 =A0Even=20
<BR>within your limits, however, there is the difference between {poi} and =
{voi}=20
<BR>({je} won't enter much because of the inaccuracy it introduces -- a big=
 mouse=20
<BR>is not both a mouse and big, after all).
<BR>A shelled insect might be {cakcinki} in the {cinki poi se calku} sense,=
 but a=20
<BR>beetle is {cinki VOI se calku} -- the definer's choice and to Hell with=
=20
<BR>anything other than is convenience.
<BR>
<BR>&lt;Why does the dictionary have an English gloss (which as I see it is=
=20
<BR>meaningless many times [for example brabloti =3D ship (?!)]), but not=20
<BR>the 'long' version of the lujvo, using poi and be? This would be=20
<BR>a 'real' definition, which can include the entire place structure.&gt;
<BR>
<BR>A fair question and a good suggestion, if you'd like to carry it out. =
=A0But it=20
<BR>would not always clarify matters completely and the English gloss often=
 does=20
<BR>(ship is a big boat -- big enough to carry other boats). Making the=20
<BR>constructor think the long form through might make for better lujvo, to=
o.
<BR>
<BR>Since tanru are (very) semantically ambiguous, how can we allow=20
<BR>ourselves to define language concepts using tanru (e.g. &lt;sumti tcita=
&gt;,=20
<BR>&lt;se steci srana&gt;, etc? Those would mean extremely 'wide' concepts=
!&gt;
<BR>
<BR>Language concepts are extremely wide too. =A0And the narrow definition =
is in=20
<BR>the grammar.
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>&lt;Why the hell does &lt;brivla&gt; mean what it means? How do the two=
 terms=20
<BR>connect, and why would it mean only one word? What's the real=20
<BR>difference between a brivla and a selbri, then? I mean, &lt;nu prenu ke=
i&gt;=20
<BR>is lo valsi, isn't it?&gt;
<BR>
<BR>Skipping a long story of sloppy communication and mutual misunderstandi=
ngs=20
<BR>and misapplied technical terms (in short, the history of Loglan/Lojban=
=20
<BR>technical terminology), this is a hard one to answer -- and the tale is=
 too=20
<BR>long for even a face-to-face. =A0And it is probably too late to try to =
do it=20
<BR>all over again right, but a brief attempt may be ok. =A0{bridi} means=20
<BR>"predication," a predicate-centered construction that can be asserted,=
=20
<BR>questioned, applied as a description and so on. =A0At the center of a=20
<BR>predication is, obviously, a predicate, which may be expressed in one o=
r=20
<BR>several words and with a variety of auxiliary devices. =A0A one-word pr=
edicate=20
<BR>is a brivla (actually, as the list notes, a selbrivla) and it keeps tha=
t=20
<BR>status even when it is combined into a more complex predicate in a=20
<BR>predication. =A0The predicate of a predication is (automatically) a sel=
bri,=20
<BR>whatever it is made up of -- one word, several in an unmarked structure=
, or=20
<BR>in a structure of whatever complexity. And no, {nu prenu kei} is not a =
valsi=20
<BR>but a valsi porsi (porsi lo valsi). =A0It is a potential selbri, though=
 not a=20
<BR>functional one as given, but it is not a brivla, since not a valsi.
<BR></FONT></HTML>
           
--part1_14.12a0da6c.280cb270_boundary--