Re: [lojban] Historian: what's up with directional words?

[Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>]

On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 01:26:48PM -0400, Bob LeChevalier, President
and Founder - LLG wrote:
> Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 06:46:28PM -0400, Bob LeChevalier,
> >President and Founder - LLG wrote:
> >
> >>Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >>
> >>>The direction words (pritu, zunle, trixe, etc) are phrased very
> >>>strangely:
> >>>
> >>>zunle = x1 is to the left/left-hand side of x2 which
> >>>faces/in-frame-of-reference x3.
> >>>
> >>>What does "which faces" mean?  It seems to imply that x2 must
> >>>have a natural facing/front, which is bad.  Why do we even care
> >>>about facing in this contexnt?
> >>
> >>Pretend that you are multilaterally symmetrical, and that you
> >>have no front.  Identify what is to your left.  Now rotate
> >>yourself 180 degrees, and what is "to your left" is what used to
> >>be "to your right".  Thus your orientation/facing/frame of
> >>reference, is essential to defining what "to your left" means.
> >
> >
> >Obviously, but why is that a feature of the *x2*, instead of the
> >*x3* which is the frame of reference?
> >
> >In other words, please describe this picture using {pritu}, and
> >fill all places (feel free to fill some places inspecifically):
> >
> >http://ynevar.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/apple-and-orange.jpg
> 
> Ah.  Your example shows me the problem.  There are three and not
> two objects that are relevant here - an apple, and orange, and an
> observer, whose orientation and relationship to the apple and
> orange (or their image) determines what is to the left.

Precisely.

> The basic concept for direction words presumed that the
> observer/observation origin had to be specified.  The norm that we
> had in mind was the situation where x2 is the observer, and
> his/her orientation is critical to what is left/right.
> 
> When comparing two objects, neither of which is the observer, the
> observer becomes part of x3 (though how to phrase frames of
> reference places in Lojban was something that I never seriously
> tackled).

[snip tackling]

> >None of which tells me why the x3 is there; it seems utterly
> >superfluous.
> 
> As I hope is clear from my examples, the x3 is vital because left
> and right have no meaning without a frame of reference.

Well, it is *now*.  Before you had x2 as the observer.

FWIW, IRC generally settled upon {le plise cu pritu le najnimre mi}
as being both complete and sufficient for normal purposes.  This
would mean that the case you were talking about is {le plise cu pritu
mi mi} (if there was, in fact, an apple to your right).

In either case, IMO facing should be specified in the x3; something
like {le plise cu pritu le najnimre le viska be fa'a le snanu} (I
can also imagine solutions for "facing south" with farna or jvinu,
but they are less obvious).

Assuming you agree, the definitions need some serious clarification.

-Robin

-- 
http://singinst.org/ :  Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.
.i ko na cpedu lo nu stidi vau loi jbopre .i danfu lu na go'i li'u .e
lu go'i li'u .i ji'a go'i lu na'e go'i li'u .e lu go'i na'i li'u .e
lu no'e go'i li'u .e lu to'e go'i li'u .e lu lo mamta be do cu sofybakni li'u

-- 
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.