From lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRDaucvxBBoEfMkf2A@googlegroups.com Fri Jul 29 09:16:41 2011 Received: from mail-gw0-f61.google.com ([74.125.83.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Qmpjo-0003pk-Ob; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:16:40 -0700 Received: by gwb11 with SMTP id 11sf7903640gwb.16 for ; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:16:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-yahoo-newman-property:x-yahoo-newman-id :x-ymail-osg:x-mailer:references:message-id:date:from:subject:to :in-reply-to:mime-version: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; bh=AoJitGgZDfs4WltYKd5aJuOgHvfr0LIZtTv5su2Vwho=; b=zPYSD91Vj0Y8osL/8T0v2EUCo7w66XE50PtG5yfW+WgdMbKgTyrOanBD953zrLOUHT CTkEvKICZlE/BiFWIhKJOAxHU1EzaGAKIi/nN6Xp+VEz4zDVhWhe6pPLO4o36mvacSYQ BnoHkNHDaWxdBcbi2GEeecclTGI+1qFu/82v4= Received: by 10.150.95.15 with SMTP id s15mr316457ybb.54.1311956186400; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:16:26 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.151.7 with SMTP id d7ls7317503ano.3.gmail; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.168.3 with SMTP id q3mr1643491ane.22.1311956184436; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.168.3 with SMTP id q3mr1643489ane.22.1311956184415; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm2-vm0.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com (nm2-vm0.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com [66.94.237.66]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id t25si3440291anp.1.2011.07.29.09.16.24; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 66.94.237.66 as permitted sender) client-ip=66.94.237.66; Received: from [66.94.237.126] by nm2.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jul 2011 16:16:24 -0000 Received: from [66.94.237.109] by tm1.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jul 2011 16:16:24 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1014.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jul 2011 16:16:24 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 59161.59608.bm@omp1014.access.mail.mud.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 2893 invoked by uid 60001); 29 Jul 2011 16:16:23 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: 89NL2FMVM1kZ2jsdID9Il5UJpOg.uRSOAOGPRQBJjxlyUqS FP5vuyUYgbEjS2iM8x5FO4IFUoGUvUuEjiXvdjUj5t4IiNs3KgfOP0y4t8zr Ux1RflMfeJfJEFN2fFZvizfF.sbC_HjhnJVaLDqevKFTjN1bU8uyzgFKgccC 9iJOf9VStWbD.Rzh5EWuuMjb3lm_F7wvfCKILL4GXGwAjLQ36Z.N3YOaAAx8 bot3cXSZRvrkzHArOfSqVRGvXro_1odrBoiPIXN.wH_r4AoxzGFKx3OUsgPS KyoKtyky4mKdE6ya87ozzgssk4jUJq6h1zxVLJh.Fb0ew05ja8wh3p4h1QUR 7UhrIx7qiJVHibnW09EQkH18j3nF2SXXR0cc4lJlORQpFahjh.tw7i7RayH3 i4MYuqSnxXLDl7fYEIdQBwRJ_ht_jOvs6pOChCCbb4ms_Ld5QhxwYOXfO8LJ 3loZUn5rgJ0IO.5jVrs44cOsgOGKvFp5o0m_vVR3rJNQ- Received: from [99.92.108.41] by web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:16:23 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/574 YahooMailWebService/0.8.112.310352 References: <201107191408.50207.phma@phma.optus.nu> <1311780839.58357.YahooMailRC@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1311870454.18589.YahooMailRC@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <1311886424.23009.YahooMailRC@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1311956183.91337.YahooMailRC@web81303.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:16:23 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: Re: [lojban] Gerunds, infinitives and other technicalities To: lojban@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 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 66.94.237.66 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 Well, this is a move forward. The AND involved in these examples are tanru constructions, two words (from two concepts) forged into a single construction, with a new meaning that derives from that of the two original concepts and some unspecified glue that holds them together. Agitprop is propanganda (A) for the purpose of stirring up the masses (B), so the AND here (which physically is only concatenation) is the notion of using something A for a purpose B. As such, the combined form inherents some of the meanings of each of the original words (not, for example, spreading the Gospel for A nor nervous tics for B) and also an appropriate part of the meaning of the glue. So you want question AND questioning AND quest. So, now all you have to do is: 1. decide what you want to your final notion to inherit from each of these pieces (and as you do that, consider whether another word might not point to that feature more directly -- this one, in English is going to sound like double plus ungood duckspeak) decide what the glue is to be in each case (this also involves deciding how the pieces are to be fit together: one ternary relation, two binary ones or several binary ones connecting various parts independently and then joining the products). That done, you have your word (good for any language with the appropriate modifications) and your definition. So, it would be nice to see, to start with, the answers to 1 and at least parts of 2. ----- Original Message ---- From: Escape Landsome To: lojban@googlegroups.com Sent: Fri, July 29, 2011 9:10:31 AM Subject: Re: [lojban] Gerunds, infinitives and other technicalities Luke, I am not doggy-philosophically qualified to tell if Cummerbund is a valid concept. But Dao is regarded by philosophers as a valid concept even if it embodies some multiple inheritance... Also, I don't think you're ignorant, you just have a more mathematics-polarized mind than me (besides, this is not plainly exact, I think OOP-multiple inheritance can be mathematically-logically understood). Why not being entitled to mix notions together ? After all, what is "agit-prop" ? This term refers to a specific mix of "agitation" and "propaganda". Hence, the soviet neologism. This is a particular case of deciding it is valuable, to some extent and for some usage, to mix up together A and B, and get the mixed-notion (A+B). There are many other examples in language, either in tool names, in philosophic or political concepts, in some caracterisation of some hybrid species, and so on... You would argue that mixing up concepts is the kind of "ideological" nonsense, or illogical argle-bargle that Lojban want to get rid of. In some sense, the fact that it occurs a lot in ideology and philosophy, two non-neutral thought-fields, is a hint... But, well, even this is no argument : if someone wants to show that the use of a notion (or a simili-notion) is argle-bargle, it is necessary for him to be able to term it, to design it... thus, it is required we can say even illogical base pseudo-notions in Lojban, even if it be just to trample them down. Someone can scold me, but I think that { speaking of a (both A and B)-object is valid } IFF { speaking of a A-object AND speaking of a B-object are valid }. -- 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@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. -- 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@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.