Re: gismu list proposals, responses

[nsn (Nick Nicholas)]

The Seraphim surely rejoiced when Logical Language Group spoke thus:

Hi guys. Sorry I've been incommunicado this week again; not to bore you all
with my viscissitudes, but... *sigh*. This is the fourth and last time I make
an attempt at an e-mail relationship. Any suggestions on how to make this
{.e'u mi'o cajeba xamgu simpe'o} thing work will be appreciated. *sad smile*

Interestingly enough, this will have cafe Lojban ramifications; while we were
still in the thick of it, she wrote a cafe piece describing how cool we were
together; and when I get the strength to, I'll write me a response piece (in
Lojban) about how things go awry after all... Meeting up with someone 
physically will help me write about this all the better, I think.

*shrug* Oh well. One lives and learns.

I can't find the original to the gismu place proposals in my directory, which
means it's on disk somewhere. Anyways; I did react to these at the time,
didn't I? I'll try and retrieve the originals some time next week, but I'll
just see what I can get out of these comments:

}dargu:  are x2 and x3 (endpoints) necessary, given x4 as route?  (also
}naxle, etc.)
}yes - 1) in practice, route may be specified either as an interval or a via
}2) the from/to is a focus and may not actually be the endpoints.  I95 is
}a road from here to NYC, but the route place would not necessarily
}indicate that these two points are the focus, since the road goes beyond
}DC and NYC.
}3)like birthday with jbena, this is a commonly enough used relationship
}for dargu as to warrant including it.
}4) cf. klama, for which the route, if expressed as an ordered set would
}theoretically make origina and destination unnecessary.

Hm. I recall John went along with this; this isn't crucial enough for me to
go vehement on, but none of these points make me think a place structure
without x2 and x3 is untenable --- given more flexible specification of
intervals in x4 (allowing omission etc.) I think (3) does it for me ---
thinking of the song "The Road To Dundee". (Yes. Everything right now is
reminding me of her. If someone goes teary-eyed reading through a gi'uste
to update the rafsi, you know they're far gone *smile*) I don't see why
x4 need specify the full route, but... hm. Ok. Let it stay as such. (Mind
you, killing x2 and x3 would give rise to a situation not unlike cleft
place structures, where there's a conflict between the intuitive and the
unredundant).
 
}jalra: for "cockroach" read "cockroach/termite"
}jalra: rationale: such are the facts; surprise!

This stuff gave rise to the whole animal gismu thread, and I'll respond it
separately. For what it's worth, I do think this is worth discussing during
Logfest.

}kagni: interchange x2 and x3 places
}kagni: rationale: purpose more useful than charterer?
 
}Possibly, but not necessarily:  the megacorporations like the Japanese
}have are better identified by nationality of charter than by a specific
}purpose, and indeed most discussion of companies in an international
}environment will probably have the counortant.  In
}general, I think that tools and apparati are going to tend to have the
}most complex place structures, and they probably should.

Hm. On the other hand, I think most talk of kagni will be in the "firm" end
of the spectrum rather than the megacorporation end, and that though x3 will
not always be more useful than x2, it will be so often enough that the
switcharound is worth making. "Law firm" and all that.

Your final sentence crops up again (and seems to belong to) your discussion
of panbe. Stuff coming from your site seems to get garbled often, Lojbab;
anything that can be done about this?
 
}pambe:  Your rewording makes it so vague, no one will know what to do
}with it, and could easily be covered as a trivial lujvo -
}pressure-cause.  I agree with the commenter that said the change was
}going too far.  

It may well have been me; in any case, I'm not going to counter Lojbab on
this one.

}sakci: add "fluid x2" and renumber existing x2 and x3
}sakci: for "x1" read "x1 (agent)"
}sakci: rationale: sucking requires something which is sucked
}Yes and no.  I certainly don't see x1 as clearly agentive, but there is
}confusion between x1 and x2.  I'm rewording, but not as requested.

Hm. If not agentive, then we do need a neat causitive for agentive sucking
(sakcygau = create such and such a vacuum for sucking x in). I agree that
something needs to be sucked; that's what we think of when we think of
sucking, and I can see no clean lujvo way of encoding the concept of
sucking fluid (socku? Hm.) I'd certes be interested to see your rewording.

}salta: "x1 is a quantity of..." can't be mass; "set ext." is not used
}salta: for "x1 (mass)" read "x1"; for "x2 (set ext.)" read "x2"
}sanso: for "x3 (set ext.)" read "x3"

This one has lost me; I think John agreed this wasn't of consequence?
 
}skoto: delete "(metaphor: Gaelic/Celtic)"
}skoto: rationale: use le'avla for "Gaelic" (includes Eire) and "Celtic" (includes Wales, Brittany, etc.)

I agree with John; if you're to extend the meaning of skoto like this, you
should change the keyword too; this looks like another job for Logfest. In
fact, maybe even a gismu change.

}traji: note: need to fix serai, terai, verai in cmavo list
}traji: reorder to x1-x4-x2-x3 to agree with zmadu and mleca

}No. traji is related to mutce and milxe, not to zmadu and mleca Also,
}per your extended comment, x4 may be a range, not necessarily a set.

Mpf. I find myself saying "if it isn't related to zmadu, it should". I think
people will far more often think "comparative - superlative; parallel place
structures" than they will "much - superlative", and that traji will not see
much use outside of lujvio/tanru. *shrug* I'd have to redo the jvoste, because
I assumed this change was approved (and that was no small amount of wishful
thinking, I'll admit! :)

}zgike: delete "performed by x3"
}zgike: rationale: music need not be performed; use cusku or tigni
 
}actually, I better accept the argument that music need not be
}'composed', and removed x2.  It isn't music until it is realized.  I
}think that the performer need not be agentive (i.e. naturally occuring
}musical sounds), and worded it as performed/produced.

Yeah. This actually makes sense.

---
'Dera me xhama t"e larm"e,            T  Nick Nicholas, CgS & CS, Melbourne Uni
 Dera mbas blerimit                   |  nsn@munagin.ee.mu.oz.au (IRC: nicxjo)
 Me xhama t"e larm"e!                 |  Milaw ki ellhnika/Esperanto parolata/
 Lumtunia nuk ka ngjyra tjera.'       |  mi ka'e tavla bau la lojban. je'uru'e
 - Martin Camaj, _Nj"e Shp'i e Vetme_ |                *d'oh!*