Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:13:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IkOGL-0005jx-7I for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:13:57 -0700 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.187]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IkOGH-0005je-Cc for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:13:57 -0700 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 4so1027637nfv for ; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:13:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=mA/XXMbSSTQ9btQJGPwdhz8PmwzpTdPVacRQ9TWtwcY=; b=ZkEPdoe3g6l82S0JgD6eghRm0l6cLhH7HQYRwZTVnHODP123gunlzFvngM9KcX2clVPR1WPXRFCqi5nVrz3rDKSDtsPRxCGTvEa3qDd1Dy8klx8ECKVDRBLVxJgYG08aoXDoL7V5E7B7dtxlxH3fLezxC7cayxiSiMISV/r2sQU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=hrdHqK2K3AUHImeFsPANXFZnNZvdDvPROIZv2cEINiJh8wQBsau5rlfL+0AZ39Qmjh8RtSNYjQwF3fJL1GxsSakjM7UL854bwRD3mia5bLQ8QqC1ums68onTLRvuJ/WUn0WFwn1IexN6PnJqAb7eKXRrVSCeC3mlmSo2gHhBaXM= Received: by 10.86.1.1 with SMTP id 1mr566885fga.1193163226943; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:13:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.86.27.5 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:13:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6ee9d0ca0710231113n4e2889adl8700f7e124a5c095@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 14:13:46 -0400 From: "John Daigle" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: learning to climb on floors In-Reply-To: <97f5058c0710231049k120b01a5o7dbbe705522431f2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_5864_22384124.1193163226920" References: <6ee9d0ca0710222351q7547a487q41a4e89b31ab2f30@mail.gmail.com> <200710230703.04940.phma@phma.optus.nu> <6ee9d0ca0710230707q775f2d89o8a33afd586c69b56@mail.gmail.com> <5e124660710230747q6dcb1da8y4e3fca5c10e4952f@mail.gmail.com> <6ee9d0ca0710231028y4e96cb86s6417bad09115c5cd@mail.gmail.com> <97f5058c0710231049k120b01a5o7dbbe705522431f2@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 5549 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: johnpdaigle@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners Content-Length: 7393 ------=_Part_5864_22384124.1193163226920 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Oh! Right, I'm sorry. I had it pegged as x5, not x3! Sorry. So literally, connor is learning about the activity of crawling with the "fi". But that seems ambiguous... is Connor learning about crawling in an abstract sense or is he aquiring the skill of crawling? la kan,r cilre fe le zu'o cpare le loldi It parses on the translator as "Name is/does learning the activity of climbing the floors". That seems closer to what I want, but it seems like people are avoiding this usage. May I ask what is wrong with it? Finally, does my use of binxo make sense to use instead, to indicate the internal transformation from one who is unable to crawl to one who is able to crawl? djan. On 10/23/07, Penguino wrote: > > Actually, x3 of {cilre} is the subject learned, not the method. > > On 10/24/07, John Daigle wrote: > > > > I'm not understanding how "cilre fi lo nu cpare" removes the ambiguity. > > x1 is learning by the method of crawling, but it isn't clear what x2 is. In > > other words, connor could be learning where things are in the house by > > crawling, or learning the difference between carpet and hardwood, or > > anything. > > > > la kan,r. cilre le zu'o cpare le loldi (or lo zu'o cpare le loldi) is > > just as bad. Now Connor is learning about the activity of crawling, but what > > we want is for connor to learn to be a crawler. > > > > Maybe > > > > la kan,r. binxo le cpare be le loldi > > > > or > > > > la kan,r. binxo le cpare be le loldi lo zu'o cpare > > > > captures the idea of aquiring a skill better? > > > > It seems like an entire book for 3-5 year olds could focus on the verb > > "clire", as in "Connor learns by walking. He learns to keep his balance. He > > learns about steps. He learns about (etc.) > > > > On 10/23/07, Wim Coenen < wcoenen@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > 2007/10/23, John Daigle : > > > > > > > > In re: 'cilre cpare' > > > > > > > > If x1 is "learning-crawling" does this imply that x1 is both > > > > learning and crawling, with an emphasis on crawling? Could this translate > > > > as "practicing crawling"? Or is this tandu just meaningless? > > > > > > > > > > > The place structure of "cilre cpare" is that of the last gismu, > > > "cpare". "cilre" modifies the meaning of "cpare", but lojban does not > > > specify how. "mi cilre cpare" may mean: > > > "I (am learning to) crawl" > > > > > > But It could also be interpreted as: > > > "I crawl (as a demonstration, to teach crawling)". > > > > > > It is safer to avoid tanru if you don't want to be ambiguous. This is > > > why Pierre rewrote your example as " la kan,r. cilre fi lo nu cpare". > > > > > > mu'o mi'e .uim > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > John Daigle > > > -- John Daigle ------=_Part_5864_22384124.1193163226920 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Oh! Right, I'm sorry. I had it pegged as x5, not x3! Sorry.

So literally, connor is learning about the activity of crawling with the "fi". But that seems ambiguous... is Connor learning about crawling in an abstract sense or is he aquiring the skill of crawling?

la kan,r cilre fe le zu'o cpare le loldi

It parses on the translator as "Name is/does learning the activity of climbing the floors". That seems closer to what I want, but it seems like people are avoiding this usage. May I ask what is wrong with it?

Finally, does my use of binxo make sense to use instead, to indicate the internal transformation from one who is unable to crawl to one who is able to crawl?

djan.

On 10/23/07, Penguino <spheniscine@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, x3 of {cilre} is the subject learned, not the method.


On 10/24/07, John Daigle < johnpdaigle@gmail.com > wrote:
I'm not understanding how "cilre fi lo nu cpare" removes the ambiguity. x1 is learning by the method of crawling, but it isn't clear what x2 is. In other words, connor could be learning where things are in the house by crawling, or learning the difference between carpet and hardwood, or anything.

la kan,r. cilre le zu'o cpare le loldi (or lo zu'o cpare le loldi) is just as bad. Now Connor is learning about the activity of crawling, but what we want is for connor to learn to be a crawler.

Maybe

la kan,r. binxo le cpare be le loldi

or

la kan,r. binxo le cpare be le loldi lo zu'o cpare

captures the idea of aquiring a skill better?

It seems like an entire book for 3-5 year olds could focus on the verb "clire", as in "Connor learns by walking. He learns to keep his balance. He learns about steps. He learns about (etc.)


On 10/23/07, Wim Coenen < wcoenen@gmail.com> wrote:
2007/10/23, John Daigle <johnpdaigle@gmail.com>:
In re: 'cilre cpare'

If x1 is "learning-crawling" does this imply that x1 is both learning and crawling, with an emphasis on crawling? Could this translate as  "practicing crawling"? Or is this tandu just meaningless?


The place structure of "cilre cpare" is that of the last gismu, "cpare". "cilre" modifies the meaning of "cpare", but lojban does not specify how. "mi cilre cpare" may mean:
"I (am learning to) crawl"

But It could also be interpreted as:
"I crawl (as a demonstration, to teach crawling)".

It is safer to avoid tanru if you don't want to be ambiguous. This is why Pierre rewrote your example as " la kan,r. cilre fi lo nu cpare".

mu'o mi'e .uim





--
John Daigle




--
John Daigle ------=_Part_5864_22384124.1193163226920--