From a-rosta@alphaphe.com Sun May 05 18:39:16 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: a-rosta@alphaphe.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_2); 6 May 2002 01:39:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 65119 invoked from network); 6 May 2002 01:39:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 May 2002 01:39:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp.alphaphe.net) (217.33.150.223) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 May 2002 01:39:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 24512 invoked by uid 101); 6 May 2002 01:39:12 -0000 Received: from host62-7-152-79.webport.bt.net (HELO oemcomputer) (62.7.152.79) by smtp.alphaphe.net with SMTP; 6 May 2002 01:39:12 -0000 To: Subject: RE: [lojban] Numbers and digits (was Re: bases) Date: Mon, 6 May 2002 02:39:17 +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: <0GVN00H2EM8F4Z@mta6.snfc21.pbi.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 X-EDATA: smtp.alphaphe.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AlphaPhe.Net (www.alphaphe.net) From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110020381 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 14224 Edward Cherlin [mailto:edward.cherlin.sy.67@aya.yale.edu] > On Sunday 05 May 2002 11:53, And Rosta wrote: > > > From: John Cowan [mailto:cowan@ccil.org] > > > Sent: 11 November 2001 17:43 > > > > > > And Rosta scripsit: > > > > And, similarly, just because Lojban has noncompositional words > > > > for zero through to 15 does not mean Lojban by default uses > > > > base 16. > > > > > > Note that dau does not represent the *number* 10, but the *digit* > > > 10; a fine distinction, but important. > > > > What is the distinction? > > It is the usual problem of use vs. mention. "li dau" uses the digit > "dau" in mentioning the number 10. [...] > The digit '1' is not the number 1, and the digit "dau" is not the > number 10. The number 10 can be represented by the digit sequence > "dau" (containing one digit) in an appropriate context, such as > following "li". > > We can say that "dau" represents the number 10 in certain contexts, > as long as we are aware that this relationship is contextual, and not > one of identity. It is correct to say that the number represented by > the string "dau" is 10, but it is nonsense to say that "dau" is the > number 10. > > li dau du li pano //Correct in some contexts > zo dau du li pano //Not just false; a category error Before I try still harder to get my head round this, John says _dau_ REPRESENTS not a number but a digit. I presume by 'represent' he meant 'signify', not 'constitute'. So you're saying that the word dau represents something, a digit, that in turn represents something else, a number? I understand from other replies that "me'o dau" refers to a digit and "li dau" to a number. But I can't see why we can't say that the word _dau_ itself means the number 10. For instance, in "dau no", '160', why can we not say that the number 10 is involved (on the grounds that "dau no" means '10 times 17 plus no 1s')? Sorry to be obtuse; I'm not used to thinking about maths. --And.