Re: [lojban] Re: round numbers

["Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On 10/15/06, Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
> Jorge Llambías wrote:
> >
> > I proposed {simsumji} for "x1 is the sum of all of x2
> > added together" <http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/simsumji>,
> > so I would propose {simpi'i} for the product.
>
> I would have suggested sorpi'i and sorsumji for the same concepts.

The expansion of {simsumji} would be something like:

{x1 sumji ko'a ko'e ko'i ko'o li'o  ije x2 no'u ko'a jo'u ko'e jo'u ko'i
jo'u ko'o li'o cu simxu lo ka x1 sumji ce'u ce'u ce'u ce'u li'o}

so x1 of simsumji is the x1 of sumji and x2 of simsumji is the x1 of
simxu, with lo ka sumji filling the x2 of simxu.

(I have used the extended version of {sumji}: "x1 is the sum of x2, x3,
x4, ...", but the same could be done with the restricted version and
some more verbiage: {x1 sumji ko'a lo sumji be ko'e bei lo sumji
be ko'i bei lo sumji be ko'o bei lo sumji li'o ...}.)

This is the general behaviour of {simxu}, which always condenses two
(or more) places into one place.

I suppose the expansion of {sorsumji} would be something like:

{x1 sumji ko'a ko'e ko'i ko'o li'o  ije x2 no'u ko'a jo'u ko'e jo'u ko'i
jo'u ko'o li'o cu so'i mei}

but the wanted place structure does not need to involve "many" as
opposed to "few" sum arguments. Of course since it's a lujvo one
could define it in whatever way one wants, but I don't see the advantage
of {sorsumji} over {simsumji}.

mu'o mi'e xorxes