From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Tue Jul 22 15:20:13 2003
Return-Path: <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 75980 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2003 22:20:12 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
  by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 22 Jul 2003 22:20:12 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lmsmtp01.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.111)
  by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Jul 2003 22:20:12 -0000
Received: from oemcomputer (host81-7-53-76.surfport24.v21.co.uk [81.7.53.76])
	by lmsmtp01.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 474031E78D; Wed, 23 Jul 2003 00:20:10 +0200 (MEST)
Message-ID: <005001c3509f$6c991620$c2e1fea9@oemcomputer>
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>, "c1tk" <tk1@despammed.com>
References: <bfjk0s+71qk@eGroups.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] zo'e, zi'o (was: Re: use of ko'a)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:20:07 +0100
Organization: Livagian Consulate
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811
X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 20438

cltk (who ar you?):
> [And Rosta:]
> 
> > The last time this was discussed (on jboske), the eventual consensus
> > among
> > the discussants (including me & Lojbab; I can't remember who else)
> > was that
> > zo'e can be zi'o. But overt zo'e cannot in good Gricean faith be
> 
> (Perhaps I should be posting to jboske, but I thought I would rant
> here first.)
> 
> This is bad -- if it becomes official, I will have to rename the
> language "tolylojban". The main problem is that each gismu can acquire
> many meanings, so instead of a single predicate tavla(w, x, y, z) we
> have several underlying predicates tavla_0() (for e.g. {tavla}),
> tavla_1(w) (for e.g. {mi tavla}), tavla_2(x, y) (for e.g. {tavla do
> ri}), etc. And I thought the Lojban creators were bent on removing
> polysemy...
> 
> Besides, there are better ways to solve the gismu blotation problem
> than to muck up the semantics of the whole language, such as removing
> little-used role places, and creating lujvo for specific senses.
> 
> Sorry, just had to rant.

Or contribute to the BF, where this will presumably come up. I would
have sent this to the BF forum, but I'm not sure who you are, so can't
be sure you're there.

Re blotation, removing little-used role places is not a politically 
acceptable solution. Usage has proved that creating lujvo is not a
workable solution either; people just ignore unwanted places.

Re tolylogji, it is a basic principle of Lojban design that concision
is inversely proportional to precision, and ellipsis and vagueness
generally go hand in hand. The vagueness in question -- between
alternative tavla predicates -- is resolvable by avoiding the 
ellipsis.

--And.