From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Oct 01 08:18:51 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:18:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MtNQg-00052m-So for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:18:51 -0700 Received: from pi.meson.org ([66.134.26.207]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MtNQZ-00052T-Mu for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 01 Oct 2009 08:18:50 -0700 Received: (qmail 13001 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2009 11:18:37 -0400 Received: from nagas.meson.org (192.168.1.101) by pi.meson.org with SMTP; 1 Oct 2009 11:18:37 -0400 Message-ID: <4AC4C84D.6040205@kli.org> Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:18:37 -0400 From: "Mark E. Shoulson" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090814 Fedora/3.0-2.6.b3.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: How to reduce the amount of something? References: <16d9defd0909301348o30bb27d4x55540b2192f1eb7d@mail.gmail.com> <4AC3C59A.7040102@kli.org> <200910010933.25417.phma@phma.optus.nu> <925d17560910010646k374e5e3aq5d836d3c5269bdf6@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <925d17560910010646k374e5e3aq5d836d3c5269bdf6@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.97a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-archive-position: 16293 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: mark@kli.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/01/2009 09:46 AM, Jorge Llambías wrote: > > If "lo ni ..." refers to a number, it can decrease. If it refers to a > property, "lo ka ... xo kau ..." then it can be the property in which > something decreases. > > The reason I keep using "ni" instead of "ka ... xo kau ..." is that > the placement of the "xo kau" is not always as obvious as is "du'u xu > kau" for "jei". I some time suggested "ni" = "ka se la'u li xo kau", > but it is definitely more awkward than the "xu kau" substitute for > "jei". If it's all about awkwardnessfullness, why didn't you just stick with {jei}, which is certainly less awkward than {du'u xukau}? I thought the problem was that {jei} didn't mean what you needed it to mean. That is, it didn't mean "the truth-value of some proposition" in intension, but meant simply one of {"true", "false"}, and that usually isn't what you want to talk about. If that is so (and I'm not saying it is; I'm trying to get a handle on this too), then presumably {ni} doesn't mean what you need either, but rather means some number, in extension, and is thus not subject to reduction (you can't reduce "35", but you can reduce "the number of kilograms someone weighs"). You can say things like {lo ni mi ca tilju cu mleca lo ni mi pu tilju} but not {lo ni mi tilju cu se cenba}. If we *can* say that, then suddenly {ni} and {jei} become useful again, and kau is not needed for every little thing. So which is it? Is {ni} the same as {ka se la'u li xo kau} or something like that, in which case {jei} is the same as {du'u xu kau}, and the latter is used only because xorxes for some bizarre reason thinks that four syllables is more elegant? Or is {jei} just a true/false value, which must be substituted by {du'u xu kau} in many situations, in which case we need to use {ka se la'u li xo kau} or whatever in place of {ni}? You can't have it both ways. ~mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJKxMhLAAoJENKD8527nYuaVPYIAOGKW3XNrzp+NVLsk9MPtzaf 7RahJ7a8RoPTWajAIPYiA/hs/L6b42g1upbeoKzK/wtZeaFZhunslnq/cwgJwvTo 5VQoIIqaB4pztIyr2PdjR36mg/Y/3heQ/rie8dAf4Tjtfx6QN96Bx/afgYDH9qBb G9Q23TOOr2WhpwrF6XHVZPo90GGBKaS/FfMvP4OTfeaOG6SykjqUpkaOyXWJUv6f 5+Fj7iz93noY5L0PW9XDrcMWhLcol0KT2ZHwWaBZUb8EPZF03L50uvrLb1uDiwnV DAWVQGjzRrshweCVmK1lAcnvZeazbNN11EiYB2jMI6uyCwtNskMRFEDG/csJIoo= =s+uF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.