Re: [lojban] Fw: xagrai and superlatives

["A. PIEKARSKI" <totus@rogers.com>]

> 
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 10:57 AM, A. PIEKARSKI <totus@rogers.com> wrote:
> >>
> > Let me take you through all the steps I went through in the development
> >  (as for any development).  That may reveal where the problem is.
> >
> > 1) Record the gismu used with all their places:
> 
> Fine.
> 
> > 2) Combine them into the most simple bridi possible
> 
> Fine.
> 
> > 3) Create the lujvo, with the rafsi in reverse order of the order of the 
>gismu
> > in the bridi, leaving the places in the same order as in the bridi.
> 
> You don't distinguish subordinate bridi places from main bridi places?

I admit I have not done so in the past - and nobody pointed out the error 
of my ways until now.  So point 3) would now be:


3) Create the lujvo, with the rafsi in reverse order of the order of the gismu 
in the bridi, leaving the places in the same order as in the bridi, but with 
subordinate 

bridi places at the end.  Reduce the places by combining those that have the 
same meaning.

from:    t1 traji loka x1 xamgu x2 x3 kei t3 t4

to:        t1=x1 xagrai t3 t4 x2 x3


> 
> > 4) Delete any places that don't make sense, or the least significant ones
> > if there are too many.
> 
> This is already done in step 2, with "zi'o". Use of "zi'o" suggests
> that the gismu was bloated in the first place.

Obviously, there will be disagreements as to which places can be deleted.
I believe some purists may argue that t3 should be kept because, although 
it is 'bloated', it is not 'nonsense'.  In other words we need to use the gismu 
as they currently are, not as we would like them to be.
'> 
> > 5) Now, EITHER (as some lojbanists would have it) leave this as the final
> > lujvo,

 t1=x1 xagrai t3 t4 x2 x3 (with or without t3)

> >
> > OR (as others would have it), shift the remaining places so that they are
> > in the order of there most common usage.
> >
> > My original question concerned point 5).  I wanted to know if there was any
> > concensus as to the best approach.
> 
> The usual order is main component first, then the rest.
> 

So if I understand you, taking into account your disapproval of t3, and 
corrections 

to point 3), {xagrai} should be

t1=x1 xagrai t4 x2 x3  
t1=x1 is the best among t4 for x2 by standard x3

which certainly is not the jbovlaste entry:

t1=x1 is optimal in property t2 of extremity t3 among range t4.

totus

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.