[lojban-beginners] Re: zgana, viska, catlu

[Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com>]

On 8/19/05, HeliodoR <exitconsole@gmail.com> wrote:
> Couldn't we use only one of the above root-words (since they have quite the
> same origin: visual observing) together with some cmavo? 

On the contrary, zgana doesn't require *visual* observing at all.
You'll note that the third place of zgana is for the senses/tools used
to observe x2.

> Like this: 
> zgana - 'sudden viska' 

Doesn't appear to be the sense of viska at all.  On the contrary,
zgana to me implies a more drawn out and detailed observing than
either catlu or viska, and includes observing through different
channels.

> catlu - 'intentional viska'

English has both "look" and "see". {catlu} seems to be "look", and
"viska" see. The distinction is much used in English, and is therefore
probably useful in lojban as well. "intentional viska" does seem to
get the sense pretty well, though.

> So catlu & zgana crossed out and everything still may be expressed; and this
> isn't the only case where a whole kit of root-words describing nearly the
> same meaning exists.

There is indeed some extra-ness in the gismu list, it seems to me, but
I don't think this is the best example of it. Myself, I wonder why
{kucli} and {cinri} are both necessary, as they seem to be the same
word with the places reversed, with no semantic difference between
them at all. (Except maybe that kucli implies more of a curiosity than
cinri, but then why are the places reversed?) And I tend to wonder why
the "by standard" place is necessary in so many words, when a single
cmavo could replace all of them and more. (Is there even a cmavo for
"by standard"?) Oh, and the "observer" place alternates often between
the first, second, and third places, sometimes without any apparent
reason.

You used logflash to learn the list, and so you aren't familiar with
the place structure of each word. I'm using Supermemo and learning the
entire place structure of each word as I go along. (I'm reformatting
and adding information when there is some information in the notes for
that gismu about the meaning of the word. I find it's not too much
information at all. The place structures tend to be intuitive, with a
couple exceptions.) The place structure gives some important clues and
direction about the meaning of the word, and so many of these close
words are less close than they look from their woefully general
glosses.

> Having an extra gismu for versions of a word seems pointless to me. 

The point of the gismu list was to make lujvo in general as concise as
possible, not put the maximum semantic distance between each gismu.
Conceptual purity in an area as messy as a base vocabulary list is
less prudent than the more practical considerations of building a
concise and useful vocabulary. While it may be a bit more difficult to
learn, if it ends up helping the fluent speaker to express themself
more concisely, clearly, and subtly, it might be worth the tradeoff.

And in any case the gismu list is completely frozen for all eternity
(until language drift kicks in) so no complaining etc. etc. I think
it's still a much better situation than any other language. Though
questions about it are always welcome!

Chris Capel
-- 
"What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it
like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?"
-- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet)