[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Tanru automatically forming



I suppose the obvious "answer" would be, "How else would you want it and why?"  This is the way it works in most languages (I can't think of an exception off-hand, but some one may come up with Piranha again or so).  It is also the way it works (insofar as this can be said to occur in Logic) in Logic, where the fact of infinite regress is taken seriously.  I doubt that any alternative was ever discussed (except for those disambiguation suggestions -- which I haven't seen in a while.  Good news?)
Sorry for the hairtrigger response; this is actually a new question, so far as I can remember, and those are now so rare that I don't even to think to notice them until forced to by later discussion.


From: Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, December 26, 2010 6:52:35 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] Tanru automatically forming

At the last two posts, especially the second-to-last one: read the first sentence of my original post. This is not a proposal; I don't actually want this changed. I'm just wondering why it was decided to be this way in the first place.

I also don't quite see how you can actually use tanru so heavily that this would make a typical paragraph (note paragraph, not sentence) of your Lojban longer. This is probably the underlying assumption that makes this make sense to me and seem bizarre to you all. I suppose I tend to use brivla more frequently; the longest passage of Lojban I've written is about 1000 words, and there are between 10 and 20 tanru in the entire thing, all of which have only one seltau.

And I get terminators fine; I miss a {ku} after a {kei} occasionally, but that's about it.

mu'o mi'e .latros.

On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Jameson Orndorff <jtorndorff@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sorry; I just can't see any substantive upside to making tanru
non-forming by default. Even as much as I see people forming them all
the time by accident (generally because they don't completely
understand how terminators work.) I may be a bit biased, though,
because I generally love using tanru. I use tons of them, because they
often get the job done faster and with the same, easily implied
meaning. For any given bridi, the only common place where you'll have
to consciously mark against tanru creation is before the 'main'
selbri, and that's easily solved with at worst a single terminator, or
{cu} to avoid multiples. I use tanru within {lo ... ku} quite often
and to have to mark that I'm creating tanru would absolutely slow my
speech and add way too much verbosity. Nothing gained, plenty lost.

As a brief aside - and please, no one take this as a a personal attack
- this sort of proposal is the sort of thing that breathes of improper
mastery of terminators. tanru became *far* less confusing and ominous
to me once I learned them properly.

mi'e .kribacr. mu'o

--
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.


--
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.

--
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.