Re: [lojban-beginners] Why is CAhA a tense/modal?

[tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com>]

On 21 April 2011 05:34, Thomas Jack <thomasjack@gmail.com> wrote:
>> According to how this CAhA is actually defined, {ro datka ka'e
>> flulimna} means {lo nu ro datka cu flulimna cu cumki}, which I'm not
>> sure would be true if there already is an actuality where some ducks
>> can't swim.
>
> Ah, do you take the Lojban<->Lojban definition ({fi'o se cumki}) at
> jbovlaste to be canonical?

There is room for disagreement and discussion on how {ka'e} is defined
in Lojban on jbovlaste, but the canonical definition should be written
in Lojban anyway. English dictionaries for English speakers aren't
written in Chinese or Swahili; why should a canonical Lojban
dictionary for Lojban speakers be written in English, especially when
one of its design goals is cultural neutrality?


> Unfortunately I don't think this is a safe strategy in general,
> whether or not xorxes is right about {ka'e}.

What exactly is unsafe about defining a word in a logical language?


On 21 April 2011 09:28, MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com> wrote:
> The canonical definitions are and always have been the English definitions.
> To check whether a Lojban definition is right, it's checked against the
> English.

The English definitions suffer from many mistakes & issues:

http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+gismu+Issues

We have to check these things too. Against what? Cross-linguistic
grounds. That's what Lojban definitions should be checked against as
well.


mu'o

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.