<<
I remember I was very confused by these expresions when I first
started learning Lojban. To me, "axis" suggests a straight line,
not a point, so I prefer "origin" for the point where the vector
originates. Also, the length of a vector is usally called "norm".
Tensors are a generalization of vectors, (as force is a vector,
tension is a tensor). The first time I read that Lojban tense
used "tensors" I was really curious, until I realized they were
nothing but the length of the vectors. Is this use of "axis"
and "tensor" standard in Logic, or is it a Lojban thing?
>>
A bit of both: "axis" and "tensor" are both in regular linguistic tense usage, tense logic tends to conceptualize the whole thing differently -- with "paths" or some such word. The usage comes, apparently, from turn-of-the-century (i.e. 19th to 20th) mathematical usage. Using "tensor" is confusing and I am trying to break mysrelf of the habit, but "axis" is even harder to get rid of (first semester of Linguistics and just about every semester thereafter.
<<
>A remote axis expression cannot, therefore, go in the
>normal tense place, since it will there attach to the x1 sumti (and putting
>{cu} before it is illegal).
I think you may be mislead by the parser here. The remote axis
expression cannot be attached to the x1 sumti just by juxtaposition.
You need {ne} or one of its kin to attach it.
>>
I wouldn't be surprised either way, since I haven't chased it down through the grammar. But the parser certainly does not treat it like a tense proper, grouping it with x1, not with the bridi tail.
<<
>This
>meets the present problem; the others (like "How do you give precise
>tensors,
>e.g., 'fifty minutes ago and five miles away'?") will have to wait.
Are you thinking of the termset thing here, or do you have some
other card up your sleeve?
>>
Well, I have not found an undoubted case of saying either of these things, let alone the two of them -- which probably could be done with a term-set if the single cases were dealt with. Add the question of giving angular instructions -- in 2 or 3 dimension -- for direction and a fistfull more, ending with trying to make sense of {mo'i} tenses (and a number of the other "solid" FAhA) in a way that makes them tenses rather than tanru. The Book is no help when it is not a positive hindrance (so I'm comoing around to, your way of thinking about the spatial tenses).
| Yahoo! Groups Sponsor | |
|
To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.