Re: [lojban] Re: brivla se brivla

[xah <xah@xahlee.org>]

if we use the lisp notation:

(function_name arg1 arg2 ...)

then "mi klama do" would be

(klama mi do)

or

((se klama) do mi)

where the function "se" modifies the function "klama" to return a new 
function that is klama with its first two args swapped.

(i'm assuming the whole lojban can be put into this syntax?)

Now suppose we have a tanru "f2 f1" where f2 is the modifier, what 
would be the lisp notation be?
(for example, in "mi sutra klama do", sutra is f2 and klama is f1)

i thought it is

((f2 f1) x1 x2)

but apparently this is wrong from your answers.
looks like it is
(f2 (f1 x1 x2))

but now then i don't quite understand this, because the first argument 
to f2 is now a complete selbri, and that often wouldn't make sense. Is 
this in fact the tanru semantic?

thanks for helping on this intricacy.

 Xah
 xah@xahlee.org
 http://xahlee.org/PageTwo_dir/more.html

On Sunday, September 14, 2003, at 10:19 AM, Arnt Richard Johansen wrote:

> On Sun, 14 Sep 2003, xah wrote:
>
> > on reading _What is lojban_ edited by Nick Nicholas & John Cowan,
> > Chapter 3. Diagrammed Summary of Lojban Grammar (comp.html), middle 
> on
> > tanru, i got confused about tanru where a conversion 'se' is placed 
> in
> > between brivla.
> >
> > what does it mean when se is place between brivla?
>
> It means that you have a tanru, consisting of the first (unconverted)
> brivla, which modifies the second (converted) brivla.
>
> > i thought it is not legal but the doc says otherwise. If i say
> >
> >?? mi sutra klama do
>
> "I quickly come to you"
>
> >
> > with the use of se it would be
> >
> >?? do se sutra klama mi
>
> "You quickly come to me". Y'know, "sutra" is not a very good example 
> here,
> because both its places gloss as "quick" - the x1 is the agent who is
> quick, and x2 is the action that is being performed quickly by the 
> agent.
> So let us invent another example:
>
> 1.? mi dunda jarco do =
> ?? (one interpretation) "I show you the donator"
>
> 2.? mi se dunda jarco do =
> ?? (one interpretation) "I show you the present"
>
> If you want to convert the entire tanru, you need "ke" to keep the
> conversion cmavo from binding closely to only one brivla:
>
> 3.? do se ke dunda jarco mi
> ??? Has the same meaning as example 1.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> --
> Arnt Richard Johansen??????????????????????????????? 
> http://arj.nvg.org/
> På hjul er du kjørende.