ji'i

[Chris Capel <pdf23ds@gmail.com>]

Hi list,

I've decided to start reading Alice in lojban as a way to learn it
(along with a flash-card program). To my surprise, the second bridi
already contained a usage that appears to go against CLL, using {ji'i}
in the middle of a string of digits. The CLL sense (in which Broca on
IRC regularly uses it) is to convey that the following digits are
approximate, and the preceeding more exact. However, the sense that
it's used ({i abuboi paji'ireroi sutra zgana le cukta poi le mensi cu
tcidu}), it seems to want to split up the two digits around it into
two separate numbers, establishing the bounds of an approximate range.
xorxes attests to this usage. Which is more common? Which is more
useful? It seems that the BPFK have proposed to change the definition.
"Number subgrammar", authored by xorxes, directly explains his
non-standard usage. Otherwise, la alis. should probably be fixed.

I can see where the standard usage would be more useful in stating
scientific measurements, as it could easily delineate where the
significant digits stop. The range usage, however, would be difficult
to use with large or precise numbers, as it would require stating many
digits twice (as in, {pamuxapino ji'i pamuxapire}). On the other hand,
for many colloquial uses, usually with only one or two significant
digits, the range ugage could well be more intuitive and useful (as
attested to by its spontaneous (to my knowledge) appearance).

I might have taken this discussion to the relevant BPFK discussion
page, but that feature of the wiki is down at the moment, and the wiki
itself is having some other problems.

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)