From lojban+bncCML0xpmUARCW0YXyBBoEnJokRg@googlegroups.com Tue Aug 09 10:04:42 2011 Received: from mail-fx0-f61.google.com ([209.85.161.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QqpjG-0004Dc-BI; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:04:42 -0700 Received: by fxd2 with SMTP id 2sf201667fxd.16 for ; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:04:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from: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; bh=LCn6OIhXdZFUbWCbdAavp/XcmLuHIxT4V5DL7CK+IEI=; b=l04oPLIUmxSrNKwx2tJklItspETds70Zz0KBMFjB9p4Fbnn37itBETHsxcw6deCTEP bfYej2eoUmrejXaJmbXhTSZ/u0Fpc/z6crCPlaeEoWQMzKsoeXy9qnIrgve7BaBI0eid XOwO9/iqkUAeWzcBfO6TH4bCKN+rP6fisL5VE= Received: by 10.223.83.1 with SMTP id d1mr1143194fal.5.1312909462836; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:04:22 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.39.211 with SMTP id h19ls880594bke.2.gmail; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.205.81.207 with SMTP id zz15mr120501bkb.0.1312909461803; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.205.81.207 with SMTP id zz15mr120500bkb.0.1312909461753; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-fx0-f53.google.com (mail-fx0-f53.google.com [209.85.161.53]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d14si52658fac.3.2011.08.09.10.04.21 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.53 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.53; Received: by mail-fx0-f53.google.com with SMTP id 23so240314fxd.26 for ; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:04:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.159.137 with SMTP id j9mr9742413fax.64.1312909461532; Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:04:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.70.137 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Aug 2011 10:04:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <201108050747.17647.phma@phma.optus.nu> Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2011 13:04:21 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Klingon proverbs in Lojban From: Ian Johnson To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: blindbravado@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.53 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=blindbravado@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.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: multipart/alternative; boundary=00235418844013b1fa04aa158e84 --00235418844013b1fa04aa158e84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Were it not for Pierre's point, there would be an importance to the connotation. Given Pierre's point this is less important. It's a little hard to word this, but I'll try. When we say "again", there is a point to us saying "again". There is a reason why we wanted to mention that not only did we do this, but we did it before. With something like {mi klama le zarci}, the fact that I have done this before in the first place is meaningless; obviously I've been to the store more than once, so {mi klama le zarci} is essentially the same statement as {mi za'u re'u klama le zarci} if I'm much older than about 4 years old. Anything that makes a phrase add nothing to a statement should at least be called into question. I see now, though, that {mi za'u re'u klama le zarci} == {mi za'u re'u zo'e klama le zarci}, though, and so the universe of discourse is not necessarily implied to be the entire timeline. The effect of THIS, though, is essentially the same as setting {za'u re'u}=={za'u xo'e re'u} instead of to {za'u pa re'u} with the universe of discourse considered to be all time. So basically I had my way all along, albeit via a different mechanism. .ui mu'o mi'e latros On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:21 PM, Ian Johnson wrote: > >> No, not anything of selma'o PA; a number that is unspecified but >> considered obvious from context. > > > Obviously. zo'e (and, therefor by extension, your proposed xo'e) is always > understood to be obvious from context. My point is that, just as *anything > * is a possible value for zo'e, any PA would be a possible value for your > proposed xo'e. > > >> The point of {za'u re'u}=={za'u xo'e re'u} is that {za'u re'u}=={za'u pa >> re'u}, which is the current equivalence means that something happens for the >> >1th time it has ever happened, which could just be the 2nd time it has ever >> happened. This doesn't carry the connotation of "again", even if it does >> carry the denotation of "again". Consider something like {xu do za'u re'u >> klama le zarci}. The connotation of "again" there is that the number {za'u >> PA} is somehow "large" in some sense; for example, if you went to the store >> for the 100th time in your life today, going to the store for the 101st time >> might be surprising if you don't usually go to the store twice in one day. >> On the other hand with the {za'u pa re'u} meaning it really doesn't carry >> any weight whatsoever because it isn't surprising that you went to the store >> at all today and because you've definitely gone to the store in the past. >> > > The connotation of a word- any word- has no bearing on a word's definition. > Connotation is neither consistent nor uniform, even when restricting it to > multiple uses by the same person. Connotation is an arbitrary thing, > determined by the people involved, the context of the situation, and many > and various other factors. There is no way to provide a standard connotation > to a word- that's what a denotation is. A connotation is an *opinion*. > That said, I do not agree that "again" has this "largeness" connotation. > Obviously this is my opinion. I went to the bathroom again. I had breakfast > again. I posted a response on this thread again. > > If you want to add "weight" to a word in Lojban, that's what we have ba'e > for. > > "I went to the store again." > {mi lo zarce pu za'ure'u klama} > > (With weight and surprise: > "I went to the store *again*!?" > {mi lo zarce pu ba'e za'ure'u .ue klama} > > >> The only real counterargument I see to this is that the universe of >> discourse can have a temporal scope, so that {lo pa re'u nu mi klama le >> zarci} could refer to the first time I went to the store *today* even though >> I've gone to the store hundreds of times in the past. This seems like a weak >> counterargument to me because of the inability to conveniently specify the >> temporal scope of the universe of discourse (which is something of a problem >> anyway, to be frank). > > > I'm not a linguist. I don't have anything to say about anything involving > the concept of a "universe of discourse". I'll leave that up to the likes of > Mr. Cowan e al. > > mu'o mi'e latros >> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Jonathan Jones wrote: >> >>> If I understand ze'ei correctly, then {zo'e ze'ei pa} means, basically, >>> "unspecified number", or, in other words, "anything of selma'o PA", which >>> means it includes numbers <=1, irrational numbers, imaginary numbers, etc. >>> Since something must happen more than once to happen "again", {za'u xo'e >>> re'u to zo xo'e selsmu lu zo'e ze'ei pa li'u toi} does not have the same >>> meaning. >>> >>> When something happens for the 2nd time {re re'u}, it is happening again. >>> When something happens for the 3rd time {ci re'u}, it is happening again. >>> When something happens for the 4th time {vo re'u}, it is happening again. >>> ... >>> When something happens for the (x>1)th time {za'u [pa] re'u}, it is >>> happening again. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Ian Johnson wrote: >>> >>>> If the default number were to be made {xo'e} (which has been proposed to >>>> mean {zo'e ze'ei pa}, especially now that its current meaning is useless >>>> with xorlo in place) instead of {pa}, then {za'u re'u} would be implicitly >>>> {za'u xo'e re'u}, which would definitely work for "again", I think. >>>> >>>> mu'o mi'e latros >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:16 PM, MorphemeAddict wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Pierre Abbat wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Friday 05 August 2011 01:43:04 MorphemeAddict wrote: >>>>>> > gunta fa la veklarg >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I don't know how to say "again" ('x+1'th occurrence?). >>>>>> >>>>>> za'ure'u - that's what it was in Alice. >>>>>> >>>>>> Pierre >>>>>> >>>>> Does "za'u re'u" already contain the idea of 'time' or 'occurrence'? It >>>>> seems to be just an ordinal number meaning 'further', 'additional'. >>>>> >>>>> Does this work: >>>>> za'u re'u gunta fa la veklarg >>>>> >>>>> I also found "krefu", but I don't know if/how "krefu" can be used to >>>>> get the meaning of 'again'. >>>>> >>>>> stevo >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> mu'o mi'e .aionys. >>> >>> .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o >>> (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >> > > > > -- > mu'o mi'e .aionys. > > .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o > (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) > > -- > 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. --00235418844013b1fa04aa158e84 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Were it not for Pierre's point, there would be an importance to the con= notation. Given Pierre's point this is less important. It's a littl= e hard to word this, but I'll try. When we say "again", there= is a point to us saying "again". There is a reason why we wanted= to mention that not only did we do this, but we did it before. With someth= ing like {mi klama le zarci}, the fact that I have done this before in the = first place is meaningless; obviously I've been to the store more than = once, so {mi klama le zarci} is essentially the same statement as {mi za= 9;u re'u klama le zarci} if I'm much older than about 4 years old. = Anything that makes a phrase add nothing to a statement should at least be = called into question.

I see now, though, that {mi za'u re'u klama le zarci} =3D=3D {m= i za'u re'u zo'e klama le zarci}, though, and so the universe o= f discourse is not necessarily implied to be the entire timeline. The effec= t of THIS, though, is essentially the same as setting {za'u re'u}= =3D=3D{za'u xo'e re'u} instead of to {za'u pa re'u} wit= h the universe of discourse considered to be all time. So basically I had m= y way all along, albeit via a different mechanism. .ui

mu'o mi'e latros

On Tue, Aug = 9, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:21 P= M, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:
No, not anything of selma'o PA; a number that is unspecified but consid= ered obvious from context.

Obviously. zo'e (= and, therefor by extension, your proposed xo'e) is always understood to= be obvious from context. My point is that, just as anything is a po= ssible value for zo'e, any PA would be a possible value for your propos= ed xo'e.
=A0
The point of {za'u re'u}=3D=3D{za'u xo'e re'u} is t= hat {za'u re'u}=3D=3D{za'u pa re'u}, which is the current e= quivalence means that something happens for the >1th time it has ever ha= ppened, which could just be the 2nd time it has ever happened. This doesn&#= 39;t carry the connotation of "again", even if it does carry the = denotation of "again". Consider something like {xu do za'u re= 'u klama le zarci}. The connotation of "again" there is that = the number {za'u PA} is somehow "large" in some sense; for ex= ample, if you went to the store for the 100th time in your life today, goin= g to the store for the 101st time might be surprising if you don't usua= lly go to the store twice in one day. On the other hand with the {za'u = pa re'u} meaning it really doesn't carry any weight whatsoever beca= use it isn't surprising that you went to the store at all today and bec= ause you've definitely gone to the store in the past.

The connotation of a word- any word- has no bea= ring on a word's definition. Connotation is neither consistent nor unif= orm, even when restricting it to multiple uses by the same person. Connotat= ion is an arbitrary thing, determined by the people involved, the context o= f the situation, and many and various other factors. There is no way to pro= vide a standard connotation to a word- that's what a denotation is. A c= onnotation is an opinion. That said, I do not agree that "again= " has this "largeness" connotation. Obviously this is my opi= nion. I went to the bathroom again. I had breakfast again. I posted a respo= nse on this thread again.

If you want to add "weight" to a word in Lojban, that's w= hat we have ba'e for.

"I went to the store again."
= {mi lo zarce pu za'ure'u klama}

(With weight and surprise: "I went to the store again!?"
{mi lo zarce pu ba'e = za'ure'u .ue klama}
=A0
The only real counterargument I see to this is that the universe of discour= se can have a temporal scope, so that {lo pa re'u nu mi klama le zarci}= could refer to the first time I went to the store *today* even though I= 9;ve gone to the store hundreds of times in the past. This seems like a wea= k counterargument to me because of the inability to conveniently specify th= e temporal scope of the universe of discourse (which is something of a prob= lem anyway, to be frank).

I'm not a linguist. I don't have anything to say abo= ut anything involving the concept of a "universe of discourse". I= 'll leave that up to the likes of Mr. Cowan e al.

mu'o mi'e latros
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail= .com> wrote:
If I understand ze'ei correctly, then {zo'e ze'ei pa} means, ba= sically, "unspecified number", or, in other words, "anything= of selma'o PA", which means it includes numbers <=3D1, irratio= nal numbers, imaginary numbers, etc. Since something must happen more than = once to happen "again", {za'u xo'e re'u to zo xo'= e selsmu lu zo'e ze'ei pa li'u toi} does not have the same mean= ing.

When something happens for the 2nd time {re re'u}, it is happening = again.
When something happens for the 3rd time {ci re'u}, it is happ= ening again.
When something happens for the 4th time {vo re'u}, it is happening agai= n.
...
When something happens for the (x>1)th time {za'u [pa] re'= ;u}, it is happening again.



On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Ian John= son <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:
If the default number were to be made {xo'e} (which has been proposed t= o mean {zo'e ze'ei pa}, especially now that its current meaning is = useless with xorlo in place) instead of {pa}, then {za'u re'u} woul= d be implicitly {za'u xo'e re'u}, which would definitely work f= or "again", I think.

mu'o mi'e latros


On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:16 PM, MorphemeAddict = <lytlesw@gmail.co= m> wrote:


On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:47 AM, Pierre Abba= t <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:
On Friday 05 August 2011 01:43:04 MorphemeAddict wrote:
> gunta = fa la veklarg
>
> I don't know how to say "again"= ('x+1'th occurrence?).

za'ure'u - that's = what it was in Alice.

Pierre
Does "za'u re'u" already contain the idea of &= #39;time' or 'occurrence'? It seems to be just an ordinal numbe= r meaning 'further', 'additional'.
=A0
Does this work:
za'u re'u gunta fa la veklarg
=A0
I also found "krefu", but I don't know if/how "kref= u" can be used to get the meaning of 'again'.
=A0
stevo

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.



--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko= cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to th= e Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.



--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e&#= 39;ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;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/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
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.
--00235418844013b1fa04aa158e84--