On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 6:57 AM, MorphemeAdd= ict <lytlesw@gmai= l.com> wrote:

"I" is (obviously) not the same as "speaker": '= ;You are the speaker" doesn't mean "You are I". Also, &q= uot;I am not the speaker" doesn't mean "I am not I".
=A0

Same for "YOU" and "listener".

=A0

stevo

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Jonathan Jones = <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 7:22 AM, MorphemeAddict <= lytlesw@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Jonathan Jones <= eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:

Well, here's hers: = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_semantic_metalanguage

I don't know if these are the same for every language- I assume so,= since that's the point, yes?- but most of them are cmavo in Lojban.
I also don't think they're very well chosen, as a lot of them = are easy to define without circularity.=20

Really? Which ones? How would you define them?

=A0
Well, I and YOU, for a start. Lojban defines those as "the= speaker" and "the listener", respectively.

2011/4/23 Jorge Llamb=EDas <= ;jjllambias@gmail= .com>

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 10:16 AM, MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com> wrote:
&= gt;
> Circularity is avoidable. That's the whole point of Anna Wi= erzbicka's
> Natural Semantic Metalanguage, which assumes a small number (~62) of &= #39;words'
> that can't be defined in terms of simpler words.=
>>

> Almost all dictionaries are unapologetic about circularity.
It's easy to fix this "problem" for any dictionary as= follows:

(1) Take any word that appears in a definition but not as = an entry and
classify it as "primitive".
(2) Take any word that appears in = its own definition and classify it
as "primitive".
(3) Pick= any remaining entry, classify it as "well-defined" and
classi= fy all still unclassified words in its definition as
"primitive".
(4) Repeat step (3) until you run out of entries.=

You end up with a pile of words classified as "primitive"= and another
pile classified as "well-defined". You can try al= l possible picking
orders for step (3) if you wish to minimize the set of primitives for
th= e dictionary, since different picking orders will result in
different se= ts of primitives.

It would be interesting to see how many primitives= result from this
process for a typical dictionary, and how the resulting list of
"pr= imitives" compares with Wierzbicka's.

mu'o mi'e xor= xes

=A0

This would indeed be an interesting experiment.

=A0

stevo

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gro= ups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send emai= l to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+un= subscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?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 the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the G= oogle Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, = send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+un= subscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+un= subscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/g= roup/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.