From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Sun Oct 14 13:34:34 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 14 Oct 2001 20:34:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 89830 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2001 20:34:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by 10.1.1.222 with QMQP; 14 Oct 2001 20:34:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta06-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.46) by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Oct 2001 20:34:34 -0000 Received: from andrew ([62.255.40.151]) by mta06-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20011014203432.BYBK268.mta06-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew> for ; Sun, 14 Oct 2001 21:34:32 +0100 Reply-To: To: Subject: RE: [lojban] re : translation challenge: "If today is Monday..." Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 21:33:51 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001a01c153dc$f6d5c5c0$9b29ca3e@oemcomputer> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 11568 Greg: > >1. If today is Monday, then tomorrow is Tuesday. > > >[Translation should be true, regardless of when it is said.] > > {lenu le pavdei cu cabdei kei nibli lenu le relday cu bavlamday} "Each of certain events wherein each of certain mondays is today entails each of certain events wherein each of certain tuesdays is tomorrow" Which events? Which mondays and tuesdays? Your Lojban should read: {ro nu lo pavdei cu cabdei kei nibli lo nu lo relday cu bavlamdei} I think nibli requires du'u as x1 and x2, though: {tu'odu'u lo pavdei cu cabdei kei nibli tu'odu'u lo relday cu bavlamdei} > >2. If today is Monday, then tomorrow is Wednesday. > > >[Translation should be false, regardless of when it is said.] > > {lenu le pavdei cu cabdei kei nibli lenu le cibday cu bavlamday} > > >(Examples from a talk by Jim McCawley.) > > >I opine that these can be lojbanned using {mu'ei} but by no > > other method. That "by no other method" is an exaggeration: a brivla equivalent of mu'ei (or in this case of {ro mu'ei} could work equally well. Perhaps that's what nibli is. > If my attempts break down because it isn't monday today, try ledu'u, > leka. If still... try lesi'o or leli'i. otherwise, we're missing a NU. > If suggesting today is monday when it isn't isn't an abstraction, I > don't know what is. I'm not sure why you think shifting to other NU is going to help. The main problem with your lojban (and everybody else's) is the {le}. All lojbanists should have to serve an apprenticeship in which they force themselves to do without {le}, so that when they become licensed to use it they use it sparingly and with due appreciation... > I don't like {mu'ei} ! (I had written a long paragraph explaining why, > but I erased it 'cause much of what I said doesn't make sense - I > suppose I just don't like the idea of lojban not being able to express > something which is so obvious in natural language) {mu'ei} is simply "if". But in fact pretty much all cmavo could be junked without reducing the range of what we could express using the remainder. Most cmavo serve to abbreviate more cumbersome expressions than to make the unsayable sayable. --And.