Re: [lojban] A revised ce'u proposal involving si'o

[pycyn@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/17/2001 2:33:38 AM Central Daylight Time, a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com writes:

All NU construct a predicate based on a bridi. The general strategy of
paraphrasing NU-lessly is to express that bridi as a lodu'u sumti that
is a sumti of a selbri synonymous with the NU.

Hmmm!  I think that is a very fruitful insight for defining these critters, a clear development of what the lists hint at.  I'm not sure it is going to be complete and I have a doubt or two about particular cases, but it needs to be developed as part of the general understanding of Lojban.  Nice job!

ni1 = x1 is the degree to which x2* is the case; x1 is the degree to which
the world would have to change for x2 to not be the case

I think that this is more likely {jei}, if I remember my discussions with *B* of Peoria rokeach [not a totla blank at least] our leading fuzzyist.  I also wonder if thesse two are the same.  Is this one of the things that xorxes keeps trying to distinguish?  If so, I never got it from what he said and I wonder if it has ever really been used -- although I can imagine someone saying something like it in a cond\fused sort of way.

<ni2 = lo du'u broda BAI ma kau [where BAI is the amount BAI>
This looks like {ni} , what ??Steven Belknap?? would call the membership function value of broda vis a vis ...  Except I think the x1 at least of broda needs to be there, and, of course, I am suspcious of {makau}, even though it seems right here. xorxes' pair both seem to be in this area somewhere, but I don't know just where.

The {si'o} sketch is about as far as can be gone at the moment.  Fleshing it out seems to be a long task.