[lojban-beginners] Re: ok, lambda/currying-geeks needed (was Re: Re: "Once More")

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On 12/14/05, Sunnan <sunnan@handgranat.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 17:18 -0300, Jorge Llambías wrote:
> >
> > Not with the current grammar, which only allows pure numbers in
> > front of ROI. No operators in any way.
>
> Can variables such as 'ti' be used?

No, only strings of PA (and lerfu, but the string must start with a PA).
The relevant part of the grammar is this:

interval-property = number ROI [NAI] | TAhE [NAI] | ZAhO [NAI]

number = PA [PA | lerfu-word] ...

lerfu-string = lerfu-word [PA | lerfu-word] ...

lerfu-word = BY | any-word BU | LAU lerfu-word | TEI lerfu-string FOI

So you can see that the only selmaho that enter into it are PA,
BY, BU, LAU TEI and FOI.

>  Are there a default variable
> (similar to perl's $_) that operators can be provided for?

I don't know what $_ does, but there are no variables in PA,
except perhaps for {no'o}.

> > > One problem with the attitudinal system is that it's based on opposing
> > > axes, like love being an opposite of hate.
> >
> > Well, that does give you two (or three even) for the price of one.
>
> But it might have an unwelcome side-effect in the sapir-whorf part of
> the brain. Love and hate can coexist (and make you suffer, like in
> battered-wife-syndrome where you can have problems hating your abuser
> enough to leave, because hate is supposed to be incompatible with the
> love you still have).

{iu iunai} is a possible combination. One does not exclude the other.

> > > or ennui
> >
> > {.u'i nai}?
>
> I don't like this one so much; the distinction between weariness and
> ennui is something I'd like to keep.
> Maybe it can be done with UI4 but that still makes a sapir-whorf-y
> connection between them (similar to the love/hate problem).

Ideally we should not associate {u'i nai} to a particular English word.
It is neither weariness nor ennui, exactly. It is {u'i nai}, which may
not coincide precisely with the feeling described by a particular word.
The English keywords are just indications of a general semantic area.

> I'd still wish there weren't so much reliance on "nai"; that nai could
> be a compliment to available opposing words. (Just like xla- in lojban
> today -- it's used, but most of the time there are different words for
> different things.)

You must mean tol-, not xla-.

The problem is that the number of available V'V forms is much more
limited than the number of gismu forms.

> > You can construct an attitudinal from a selbri with sei + selbri.
>
> Really?
>
> .ibi'usei se mipri noda jetnu
> Would that really work?

That's correct lojban. I'm not sure the example is very clear without
more context ("nothing is true"?).

> > As for their free grammar, I think that's a plus, although they might
> > have been easier to use if they modified what follows them rather
> > than what precedes them.
>
> I kinda like that part, you can add it to a name to instantly judge that
> person, like mi pu terxa'a fe la xorxes.i'e

Attitudinals are most often wanted to attach either to a whole sentence
or to a sumti. For whole sentences, they go after the .i, or conventionally
in initial position when there is no ".i". With KOhAs there is no
problem in placing the attitudinal after it, but with LE+selbri or more
complex sumti, you need to use ku so that the attitudinal doesn't end
up modifying the selbri. This is extremely cumbersome. My impression
is that {le gerku po'o} will end up meaning "the dog and nothing else" and
not "the thing that I describe as being nothing but a dog". (In fact, it is
rather frequent for people to say {po'o le gerku} when they mean
{le gerku ku po'o}, because of the English word order.)

mu'o mi'e xorxes