From pycyn@aol.com Mon Aug 12 18:37:42 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 13 Aug 2002 01:37:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 98335 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2002 01:37:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Aug 2002 01:37:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r07.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.103) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Aug 2002 01:37:42 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v33.5.) id r.1ab.6a6c2c0 (4529) for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 21:37:39 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <1ab.6a6c2c0.2a89bce3@aol.com> Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 21:37:39 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] RE: Tenses To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1ab.6a6c2c0.2a89bce3_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 15026 --part1_1ab.6a6c2c0.2a89bce3_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/12/2002 6:36:41 PM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: << > I remember I was very confused by these expresions when I first > started learning Lojban. To me, "axis" suggests a straight line, > not a point, so I prefer "origin" for the point where the vector > originates. Also, the length of a vector is usally called "norm". > Tensors are a generalization of vectors, (as force is a vector, > tension is a tensor). The first time I read that Lojban tense > used "tensors" I was really curious, until I realized they were > nothing but the length of the vectors. Is this use of "axis" > and "tensor" standard in Logic, or is it a Lojban thing? >> A bit of both: "axis" and "tensor" are both in regular linguistic tense usage, tense logic tends to conceptualize the whole thing differently -- with "paths" or some such word. The usage comes, apparently, from turn-of-the-century (i.e. 19th to 20th) mathematical usage. Using "tensor" is confusing and I am trying to break mysrelf of the habit, but "axis" is even harder to get rid of (first semester of Linguistics and just about every semester thereafter. << >A remote axis expression cannot, therefore, go in the >normal tense place, since it will there attach to the x1 sumti (and putting >{cu} before it is illegal). I think you may be mislead by the parser here. The remote axis expression cannot be attached to the x1 sumti just by juxtaposition. You need {ne} or one of its kin to attach it. >> I wouldn't be surprised either way, since I haven't chased it down through the grammar. But the parser certainly does not treat it like a tense proper, grouping it with x1, not with the bridi tail. << >This >meets the present problem; the others (like "How do you give precise >tensors, >e.g., 'fifty minutes ago and five miles away'?") will have to wait. Are you thinking of the termset thing here, or do you have some other card up your sleeve? >> Well, I have not found an undoubted case of saying either of these things, let alone the two of them -- which probably could be done with a term-set if the single cases were dealt with. Add the question of giving angular instructions -- in 2 or 3 dimension -- for direction and a fistfull more, ending with trying to make sense of {mo'i} tenses (and a number of the other "solid" FAhA) in a way that makes them tenses rather than tanru. The Book is no help when it is not a positive hindrance (so I'm comoing around to, your way of thinking about the spatial tenses). --part1_1ab.6a6c2c0.2a89bce3_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/12/2002 6:36:41 PM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:

<<

I remember I was very confused by these expresions when I first
started learning Lojban. To me, "axis" suggests a straight line,
not a point, so I prefer "origin" for the point where the vector
originates. Also, the length of a vector is usally called "norm".
Tensors are a generalization of vectors, (as force is a vector,
tension is a tensor). The first time I read that Lojban tense
used "tensors" I was really curious, until I realized they were
nothing but the length of the vectors. Is this use of "axis"
and "tensor" standard in Logic, or is it a Lojban thing?

>>

A bit of both: "axis" and "tensor" are both in regular linguistic tense usage, tense logic tends to conceptualize the whole thing differently -- with "paths" or some such word. The usage comes, apparently, from turn-of-the-century (i.e. 19th to 20th) mathematical usage. Using "tensor" is confusing and I am trying to break mysrelf of the habit, but "axis" is even harder to get rid of (first semester of Linguistics and just about every semester thereafter.

<<
>A remote axis expression cannot, therefore, go in the
>normal tense place, since it will there attach to the x1 sumti (and putting
>{cu} before it is illegal).

I think you may be mislead by the parser here. The remote axis
expression cannot be attached to the x1 sumti just by juxtaposition.
You need {ne} or one of its kin to attach it.
>>
I wouldn't be surprised either way, since I haven't chased it down through the grammar. But the parser certainly does not treat it like a tense proper, grouping it with x1, not with the bridi tail.

<<
>This
>meets the present problem; the others (like "How do you give precise
>tensors,
>e.g., 'fifty minutes ago and five miles away'?") will have to wait.

Are you thinking of the termset thing here, or do you have some
other card up your sleeve?
>>
Well, I have not found an undoubted case of saying either of these things, let alone the two of them -- which probably could be done with a term-set if the single cases were dealt with. Add the question of giving angular instructions -- in 2 or 3 dimension -- for direction and a fistfull more, ending with trying to make sense of {mo'i} tenses (and a number of the other "solid" FAhA) in a way that makes them tenses rather than tanru. The Book is no help when it is not a positive hindrance (so I'm comoing around to, your way of thinking about the spatial tenses).

--part1_1ab.6a6c2c0.2a89bce3_boundary--