From 33FbHSwoJBkYsitqHx21zi6ipww.kwutwrjivowwotmozw2x0.kwu@groups.bounces.google.com Thu Apr 15 11:12:07 2010 Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <33FbHSwoJBkYsitqHx21zi6ipww.kwutwrjivowwotmozw2x0.kwu@groups.bounces.google.com>) id 1O2TXi-0004HX-PK; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:12:07 -0700 Received: by gyd5 with SMTP id 5sf959491gyd.16 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:11:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:message-id:x-ymail-osg:received :x-mailer:references:date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=I1OSXBPkkoZSkrGOdP2H8BR27fPHODluL/AE6Bdt4h0=; b=JBJRKDUsNHu/RUdkj8baT8naGOo4X1ZNZYqs/wQU9TURjYy5LFZt/Ix/I+a9c8xG3o MroZ/MtEySHswblzC8cHi62vbZf79alb5Gi+Ils4GwO7iwuQ/Kuo7BckaVvq3rRgvdAT dRhxC/R1WZtlfRgiyDqHTlNmQvh428LrMdApU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:x-ymail-osg:x-mailer:references :date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :x-thread-url:x-message-url:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=CaEkAffh/fHOeEXZngso8pMm6Uy/2E4cUbxM4GhAoR4LPCK7NOtFm62YHDJ4+5Arpg uEmJe1jzUABc9sbmG/g6bMETcWhq4fGDlltRKL5NlmWpaXWZRFh/bNhxZ8J9UwODV1bn bwntlT0usZSziOiYmBf24xJfBDX1UAsY0fQ7E= Received: by 10.150.250.3 with SMTP id x3mr48521ybh.75.1271355100521; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:11:40 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.145.21 with SMTP id x21ls476755ann.3.p; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:11:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.137.8 with SMTP id p8mr319074ann.5.1271355099380; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:11:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.137.8 with SMTP id p8mr319073ann.5.1271355099350; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:11:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.199.121]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id 17si670502anx.2.2010.04.15.11.11.38; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:11:38 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.121 as permitted sender) client-ip=68.142.199.121; Received: (qmail 85186 invoked by uid 60001); 15 Apr 2010 18:11:37 -0000 Message-ID: <837286.83884.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: AXQJSOoVM1nKR1qyiwA_9x6M4pDBmz_S8foWZcPLq3yfaZx n2oa1l.Ye Received: from [71.14.73.129] by web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:11:37 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/348.5 YahooMailWebService/0.8.100.260964 References: <4BBE188B.8070807@lojban.org> <448505.50300.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <201585.79379.qm@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <201004132253.05621.phma@phma.optus.nu> <4a02d723-a934-434a-b626-0a3a9fbf803f@u22g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:11:37 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: {le} in xorlo To: lojban@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: <4a02d723-a934-434a-b626-0a3a9fbf803f@u22g2000yqf.googlegroups.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.121 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@yahoo.com X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: X-Thread-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/t/33d26e8385fed297 X-Message-Url: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/msg/cf6d25e686d1cfec Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable You lie down with a logical language, you wake up with logicians. Roshi Ca= rnap=20 (and linguists too) The good news is that logicians are totally uninterested in the vast majori= ty (and it is vast -and growing; Hell, the minority is vast) of cmavo. They= have nothing to do with logic or do so only at the level of speech acts, a= remote interest. Of the ones they are interested in, most are dismissed a= s the results of bad design (unspecified, mainly "Surely, there is a better= way to do this"): the plethora or right-hand-end markers and connectives t= hat mean the same thing, for outstanding examples. Or the various attempts = at pronouns to replace variable. But they are concerned about the gadri. descriptors. So, let me try again = to sort out the logics involved here (short of &'s comment about the placem= ent of quantifiers, which is, as it happens, quite correct but confusing ou= tside semantics). I'm not sure why this is so hard, since nothing seems to= have changed much, aside from plural reference theory (thank you, xorxes!)= . (I still have this haunting feeling that that there is a trap here somewh= ere, but none of my sticks have sprung it.) e and o differ in that e merel= y points to some thing, hoping that others will get the right things by usi= ng the attached predicate (it helps,of course, if the things pointed to act= ually satisfy that predicate and are , furthermore, the most salient such i= n the situation, but it is useful for cases of disguise and ridicule: the e= nd of an early Mickey Spillane -- or The Crying Game -- when the woman is a= man) while o picks out by the predicate the appropriate things in the situation. The bare (no -i) forms refer to the things themselves acti= ng collectively. The -i forms refer the L-set with the same things as its = members and the set then acts like the members collectively (I take it that= 'gunma' and "mass" are crude terms for the more precise L-sets). The logi= cs of things acting collectively and collections of things acting are ident= ical, but the language is different. In particular, external quantifiers t= he former are partitive and isolating 're lo broda' is two of the brodas ac= ting individually, while on the latter, the result is multiplicative: 're l= oi broda' is two sets of brodas, still acting as units. Fractional quantifi= cation brings them a little closer: 'pire lo broda' would be a fifth of the= original brodas, still acting together (I think, but I would welcome corre= ction here) and 'pire loi broda' would be a subgroup a fifth the original = size but still acting as a unit. Of course, when the referent is a single thing, the difference disappears (a singleton L-set is identical to= its member). (And so, yes, they work pretty much like at least some of the= uses of "a" and "the" in English -- the ones that Russians quickly learn t= o get right). As for the 'zo'e' script, this seems to be a wormrunner explanation (ignotu= m per ignotius), since, no matter how little I understand 'lo, loi, le, lei= ', I understand 'zo'e' (and, God help us, 'zo'e'e' ) much less. I gather t= hey are some sort of metalinguistic devices projected (always dangerous) in= to the object language. They are names (i.e., direct referring expressions= without intermediate calculations) but what they name are picked out on ea= ch occasions. All of which sounds like "le broda' to me, except for the se= mantically irrelevant 'broda' part.=20 ----- Original Message ---- From: Lindar To: lojban Sent: Thu, April 15, 2010 1:43:41 AM Subject: [lojban] Re: {le} in xorlo 1. And, despite all your complaining about how Lojban fails as a logical language and how everything is absolutely wrong, you failed to: a. Explain in what way it has failed. b. Suggest what to do next. 2. zo'e !=3D lo. I have no idea where you folks got the idea, but AFAIK "zo'e" is not "lo broda" or anything like that, it is simply an unspecified sumti, and therefore we don't need a new sumti "zo'e'e" or any such thing. It's not a particular unspecified thing, it isn't a specific unspecified thing, and it's not a thing which really is or isn't or is called an unspecified thing, it's just an unspecified sumti. 3. Bob, the absolute stupidest way I can put it, and the way I've hated explaining it, is that lo =3D a, le =3D the. That's pretty much how they universally end up getting translated. lo patfu =3D a father, determined by context, probably mine or just any given father (really depending on context) Any such thing that could fit the x1. le patfu =3D 'the' father, could still be my father, could be my father-in-law, could be my friend's father, could be somebody that we both know that acts very fatherly towards people, it could be a knot in a tree trunk that looks like your father, but the idea is that it's a particular thing you're talking about, and you're calling it "patfu". ((Sub-note: If this is wrong, then this is how a non-techy, non- linguist, non-intelligent audio engineer has perceived how these two gadri work, and it's clsn/Timo/ARJ that are to blame for teaching me incorrectly.)) 4. Why can't we use a common-sense rule? I see things like plibu (generic word for external genitalia) and vlagi (word for vulva [female external genitalia])... so we have an obvious redundancy and consistency flaw (being that we have a consistency set up from remna to pinji to ganti regarding gender specification. Get rid of vlagi. It's -extremely- obvious stuff like that which we need to just remove. Another, yet different, example is of "mabla" wherein nobody (of whom I know) uses the standard definition (something like "x1 is a derogative use of x2" or something stupid like that), and pretty much everybody else uses it as a swear (x1 is stupid/bad/detestable/shitty/ etc.), so why don't we just skip formalities and change the definition? I'm sorry that I don't have too much insight on the issue of cmavo, but the one that apparently has held the byfy back several years or whatever I fail to see as a problem. "Without intent" is my strongly believed and fully uninformed definition of ".ai nai". Honestly, I mabla-ing hate most UI in the first place (mostly because they're overused and made endlessly complex by newbies using ru'ecaisaise'iwhatever so I know precisely how happy/annoyed you are on a scale of one to a thousand including decimal places into the millionths, but I have no idea what they're actually trying to say because they forgot to use a damn gadri and accidentally a whole tanru), so I don't see why any focus is put on them. They have absolutely no practical use other than being a stupid toy for people that don't want to learn the language and just want to spam ".u'i" instead of "lol" every five seconds. It -REALLY- does not matter what ".ai nai" means, so just pick something and stick with it, and if everybody bitches about it endlessly, then change it. Personally, I'd put more focus on fixing whatever little stupid words the linguists are worried about that I'll probably never use in a million years, and more importantly, I'd work on simplifying some of the language for stupid people like myself as I still have absolutely -no- idea what "ce'u" does, what "pseudo-quantifier binding a variable within an abstraction that represents an open place." or 'lambda' is supposed to mean, and I'm scared to death of anything I haven't learned that is apparently "non-veridical" because I read in the dictionary that it means something like "a lie", which clearly means I have no understanding of what the hell it means or how to use it (like "voi"). 5. Frankly, I could give less than two shits what some Uni professor's opinion of Lojban is or what some obnoxious person that I've never seen on IRC or the mailing list (which leads me to assume they speak little to no Lojban/haven't studied Lojban and read one article somebody else wrote and immediately formed an opinion) before thinks regarding the logical-ness of Lojban, and I think that as soon as we please the bureaucrats regarding the broken bits of Lojban, we should stop griping about every little damn thing and instead focus on community efforts like encouraging people to get on Mumble and leave it on, starting -some- kind of video-based "lo do ckiku ma zvati" on YT, and getting a LOT more people to actively participate in the art and music community, including developing modern pop art and music using Lojban and coming up with music that is unique to the culture surrounding the speakers of Lojban (which brings up a small sub-point that as much as one of those HUGE key points everybody clings to like the word "Unambiguous=99" that Lojban is not culturally neutral, and the main Lojban group that regularly communicates on IRC has formed its own living concept of Lojbanic culture, including humour, games, and music, which I believe we should expand and embrace so that we have flash animations, shows, music, art, poetry, and a true art culture in Lojban). Now I shall promptly head back into IRC to have "voi" explained to me another 20 times and "ce'u" another 200. This is my wholly uninformed and (relevantly) uneducated opinion on the matter, and I apologise for none of it. - Lindar --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den. =20 --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.