From lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRC_no3xBBoEKLoo2g@googlegroups.com Sun Jul 17 14:08:29 2011 Received: from mail-pz0-f56.google.com ([209.85.210.56]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QiYZe-0005vX-0q; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:08:28 -0700 Received: by pzk33 with SMTP id 33sf5917284pzk.1 for ; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:08:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-yahoo-smtp:x-ymail-osg :x-yahoo-newman-property:references:in-reply-to :x-apple-yahoo-original-message-folder:mime-version:message-id :x-mailer:from:x-apple-yahoo-replied-msgid:subject:date:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WCk8PAX4kGwnt/lH+rEdQG2ZefPt+WdqB42/Wmtv0BA=; b=jZzkwH8kQ9SYKW6mmHHH+3Za5MzmRSkKtZ3JGqaabV+QOk6/X3/Gvy5Iqf2ZNOPDRr a3kDLZjWkiYwfEqm6fSAVRw+K6UE3E2wFOgTgddg7UAEx/EaE5mprU13sFI/U2E5FtW1 Rd6ErArb5A2CJr9sI4w0AVw8lVdwzTvILxfSY= Received: by 10.142.200.3 with SMTP id x3mr1375682wff.9.1310936895440; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:08:15 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.68.0.233 with SMTP id 9ls3005047pbh.3.gmail; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:08:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.38.8 with SMTP id c8mr1381385pbk.50.1310936894337; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:08:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.38.8 with SMTP id c8mr1381384pbk.50.1310936894324; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:08:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp103-mob.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (smtp103-mob.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [98.136.185.194]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id f8si8284800pbc.0.2011.07.17.14.08.14; Sun, 17 Jul 2011 14:08:14 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 98.136.185.194 as permitted sender) client-ip=98.136.185.194; Received: (qmail 445 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2011 21:08:14 -0000 Received: from [192.168.1.68] (kali9putra@99.92.108.41 with xymcookie) by smtp103-mob.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 17 Jul 2011 14:08:13 -0700 PDT X-Yahoo-SMTP: xvGyF4GswBCIFKGaxf5wSjlg3RF108g- X-YMail-OSG: 0QM17q4VM1lKgRd33sKdapB7qqyK9E2yetltNnMD0zrTaS9 GAnfrX3o2OQ33hNBEiv8na1iPC6Hdyn0fpproWWCGmamrdBXTMR1DTVA2WCu xt7JDk5fNY_6DTFO1.l9lPcAKqY4_f0tFuT14cURWswXitgh2o8rjx6o62re QQLeY_MqZHcVVM6W758Ih64Z9oEVHLytg7yYgjGeykLceLqGaUZ5V7t_arZ0 6JV2Dyx923ogTJOByRwYX3crL5g2H8X2but.BYw3KRJWwUwSd4HU7yrHGnqJ 5_Kkb4g.zfy.TNtsyfuAJagvKlkrWRMtFfEyjhncoP0QWwTSOz30qQSwfQa6 FZ8Zqd7AQyrF.vHeWvh_Sz8B5GAY7nJaJWYXujoqfwCQuMhsSXxWUo.MSUhz Qe5Co7oq7s07wOYAibfxqK6cgkPYPs2owSuw2uRM4BNHXwPIZKY0NEiE3pwg Dw225pfdXUw-- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 References: In-Reply-To: X-Apple-Yahoo-Original-Message-Folder: AAlojbanery Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8G4) Message-Id: <52C1D5A2-27B8-4A91-A0C3-1B3B2E012F1D@yahoo.com> X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8G4) From: "John E. Clifford" X-Apple-Yahoo-Replied-Msgid: 1_9337858_AHrHjkQAAJGxTiMizgtNeGILCzI Subject: Re: [lojban] girzu gi'i gunma gi'i se gunma in Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 17:14:59 -0400 To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 98.136.185.194 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@yahoo.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well, sorta. You can put any things together into an L-set (in this contex= t this is just easier talk for me), but that does not mean that the resulti= ng entity does everything that each of its parts does. That depends on the= rules of combination. Call our whole (set) A, composed of b, c, d. Ther= e may be some things that b, c, and d do together and so A does collectivel= y (forming a triangle, say) and all participate. There are others that one= or a few do but that the whole thereby does as well (scoring a run, for ex= ample -- because of the rules of the game). And there things that b does a= lone, which are attributable to A only indirectly in a form of words: b get= s drunk, but A doesn't thereby get drunk, only one part of A does. Lojban = allows us to name sets without specifying the rules. When the specificatio= n is descriptive, a 'lo' phrase, say, some of the rules appear, but usually= not all. In the classic "three dogs bit four men'" routine, we cannot wor= k out either how many dogs actually bit a man or how many men were bitten, = yet this is a legitimate description of an event in which only one dog in t= he pack bit one man in the quartet, under certain rules. But not under a d= ifferent set of rules that requires that each dog get a bite in on each man= . And with different rules, different places in between. This is one of t= he reasons for contracts. Sent from my iPad On Jul 17, 2011, at 13:58, Stela Selckiku wrote: > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 4:45 AM, tijlan wrote: >>=20 >> Fried eggs are "whites jo'u yolks", while omelettes are "whites joi >> yolks", according to their relative easiness and difficulty of >> separating the two cooked components. But the criteria for such >> easiness / difficulty can well be subjective. It doesn't seem to ever. = =20 >> have a rigorous logical basis. Whole milk, another example, could be >> said to be "cream joi zo'e", since removing all the cream from the >> finished product is not something that often occurs to most people; >> but such removal is trivially done by skimmed milk producers, for whom >> "cream jo'u zo'e" could be a more accustomed perception. >=20 > I think what you are describing is some situations where describing > something as a mass is *sensible*. It makes more sense to consider > things jointly when they are less easily separated. But I believe > Lojban allows you to make and discuss masses whether or not they are > reasonable. >=20 > The creation of a mass is an attribution of responsibility. Any > action taken by any of the parts of the mass, whether individually or > collectively, is considered to be done by the entire mass. It's not a > distinct class of entities; anything can be considered as a > composition of elements. For instance we're used to referring to > things like "people", which are responsible for the actions of all of > their parts (a person lifts everything lifted by their hands and sees > everything seen by their eyes), or "cars", which are responsible for > the actions of all of their parts (a car hits anything that any of its > parts hit and carries anything that any of its parts carry). The only > difference is that you can explicitly create a mass of anything. >=20 > For instance I can create a mass out of my left pinkie and a bug > crawling on a leaf in a rainforest in South America, tie those things > up with a {joi} and throw them in {ko'a}, and now I've got this > strange entity I can discuss. It's nothing that wasn't there before; > it's nothing more or less than my pinkie and that bug, considered > together. But now that we're talking about ko'a we can discuss its > various strange properties. Right now ko'a is typing the letter "a" > in the very pro-sumti that refers to it, while simultaneously using > its six legs to crawl across the leaf. The oddness of masses is that > ko'a has both a fingernail and six legs, and spans both North and > South America at once, simply because that's how I defined it. >=20 > Considered as a universally applicable abstraction that might seem > bizarre, but then consider again that innocent case of {mi joi do}. > What it does is pull out two people out of everything in the universe > to consider them together. Whenever either of us picks something up, > mi joi do is lifting it. Because of our ability to communicate and > work cooperatively, a mass that could otherwise be a bizarre > collection of elements becomes a reasonable abstraction in predicting > and discussing the world. Who knows what aggregations of elements > might sometime be sensible to consider together? We had best keep our > options open. >=20 > For instance in my story I'm working on called {mafro'i}, there's a > rock which remembers things it's put on top of. It remembers > everything it's ever been put on top of, but more strongly the longer > it's left there. Even if the objects later move, the rock can feel > where they are, and you can use it to guide you to them. So in this > story there's a mass that's reasonable to discuss consisting of all > the things that that rock has ever been set on top of, including lots > of random leaves and sticks and animals and people. You could put all > of them together and call them {fo'i}, and then say of them "by > touching the rock, she could feel that fo'i wasn't nearby." >=20 > mi'e la stela selckiku > mu'o >=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@googlegr= oups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojb= an?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.