Re: [jboske] job of BF (was: RE: individuation and masses

[Robert LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org>]

At 04:30 PM 12/21/02 +0000, And Rosta wrote:
> Lojbab:
> > >1. Which distinct notions is Lojban to be able to express?
> > >2. Which conflated notions is Lojban to be able to express?
> > >3. Which of these notions does a speaker choose to emply to describe
> > >a given thing?
> > >
> > >Xod addresses (1). You answer by making a point about (3). The one I
> > >care about is (1). We don't really have to bother with (3); I am
> > >perfectly happy for a Lojbanist to say that the mass of all monkey(s)
> > >falls from a tree. But I want to be able to treat Substance and
> > >Collective distinctly
> >
> > This is why we need to separate the byfy from jboske. byfy is solely 
> about
> > (3), making changes informed by (1) and (2) only when the answer to (3)
> > cannot be determined
>
> (3) is irrelevant to BF. (3) is about a speaker's choices.

byfy will define how the Lojban constructs can be employed.

> BF is about (1), (2) & (4):
>
> 4. What notion does a given cmavo express?

That is merely the converse of (3).

byfy is NOT about capabilities of the language (which is a matter of 
theory), but what the words actually mean to a user.

> The outcome of the BF will determine the range of choices open to
> a speaker.

I don't like that concept of what the byfy is supposed to do. It is 
defining the language, not changing the set of choices.

lojbab

--
lojbab lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org