Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 11 Feb 2003 08:18:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from f130.law8.hotmail.com ([216.33.241.130] helo=hotmail.com) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18iZsv-0004yL-00 for lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org; Tue, 11 Feb 2003 04:51:37 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 11 Feb 2003 04:51:06 -0800 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 11 Feb 2003 12:51:06 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] From: "Jorge Llambias" To: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: tanru/lujvo for [name] type of thing? Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 12:51:06 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Feb 2003 12:51:06.0944 (UTC) FILETIME=[3E5A6400:01C2D1CC] X-archive-position: 83 X-Approved-By: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@chain.digitalkingdom.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 1789 la camgusmis cusku di'e >zo rodzga cu bridi le si'o da .e de vu'o poi tcini zo'u karbi da de gi'e >tcitygau fi pa da ce de kei le zgana se zukte ku ce'o le tcita tcini ku >ce'o le na tcica tcini ku ce'o le zgana ciste > >I've seen essentially no attempts to define lojban words in lojban, >though, so take anything anyone says about this with a grain of salt. I've made a few attempts. I believe I wrote a definition in lojban for {.iglu} in jbovlaste. Also, things like: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/15897 My preferred convention for writing definitions in Lojban is to put the word being defined in the prenex and then use ko'a, ko'e, ... for x1, x2, ... in the body of the definition. For example, your definition would come out as something like: zo rodzga zo'u tu'e ko'e e ko'i tcini ije karbi ko'e ko'i ije tcitygau fi pa lu'a ko'e ce ko'i ije ko'a zgana se zukte ije ko'e tcita tcini ije ko'i na'e tcita tcini ije ko'o zgana ciste tu'u But I would expect the place structure of {rodzga} to be based on that of {zgana}. At the very least the x1 should be a Luhmann- observer, not a Luhmann-observation. If it is essential to have an observation in x1 then {rodnunzga} would be better, or else use {nu rodzga}. The place structure of {zgana} seems to offer what is needed, if we can take the x4 conditions as the "unmarked state". x3 of zgana is the "observing system". In that case we could have the simpler definition: zo rodzga zo'u tu'e ko'a zgana ko'e ko'i ko'o ije ko'a karbi ko'e ko'o ije ko'e tcita tcini ije ko'o na'e tcita tcini tu'u or something similar. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus