From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Apr 15 12:38:45 2005 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:38:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DMWeD-0001cU-KJ for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:38:37 -0700 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.203]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DMWeB-0001bY-97 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:38:37 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so893653wri for ; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:38:03 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=XCXj2cHdvaKKJIa0gzR+gs53GQ+TpASzaTjz/jXOTlixaPcXz7gXiw4CB8YAIIDm12MQ2G8jIdku3V62F/Ekmt06geIVLOf3hSQrng+eosdKmhy7SDRQLGamtokaSt3pR+HjLWb+oem/8YTwsxLJsaBJVCOHmk+wft4OWnWK/rY= Received: by 10.54.32.51 with SMTP id f51mr103687wrf; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:38:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.69.3 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:38:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <925d1756050415123866f27f8f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 16:38:03 -0300 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: X1 is X2 by definition. In-Reply-To: <20050415184257.GE13636@chain.digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <20050415104358.20376.qmail@web31309.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20050415184257.GE13636@chain.digitalkingdom.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 9838 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On 4/15/05, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > Please not that defining gismu in Lojban is Hard, because Lojban > tends not to have many words for the same concept, so some concepts > must be taken as given, and those are generally the gismu. Yes, but also it is hard because talking about definitions and meanings in Lojban is hard. It is not even clear how to talk about a meaning, as you hint below. > My Way: > > zo prami se smuni di'e .i xy pi pa ke mutce cinmo nelci xy pi re > gi'e djica lo nu di'i kansa xy pi re > > Or something like that. You could put the second half in the x2 of > se smuni, but it'd be a pain. {di'e} is a text, so if you wanted a text there you could have used {lu ... li'u}. But I don't think a text is a meaning. Maybe you meant {la'e di'e}. Then you could have used {lo du'u ...} or {lo nu ...} (I think {la'e di'e} is ambiguous between those two.) But it is not clear that the meaning of {prami} could be an event or a fact either. Safest would be {tu'a di'e}, "something related to the following sentence", but it is hoplessly vague if we are aiming for precision. I think what we want to say is something like: {lo ka ce'u xi pa prami ce'u xi re cu mintu lo ka ce'u xi pa mutce cinmo nelci ce'u xi re li'o kei lo -definition} "the two-place relationship 'x1 loves x2' is the same as the two-place relationship 'x1 intensely feels fondness for x2 etc.' by definition". Where "by definition" is the standard by which the two relationships are the same. But how do we say "by definition"? Perhaps {mintu fi lo se valsi}, "they are the same by word meaning"? mu'o mi'e xorxes