Re: [lojban] lujvo for "spelling"? (was Re: [lojban-beginners] How do you write "Eyjafjallajökull"? (a sentence from tatoeba))

[Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com>]

On 12 July 2012 22:34, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12 July 2012 19:36, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 12 July 2012 18:52, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> Also, I have better than good reason to believe that it's NOT the
>> >> >> variable b, given the definition of me'o which I'd assumed you'd
>> >> >> know:
>> >> >> "me'o = the mathematical expression (unevaluated); convert
>> >> >> unevaluated
>> >> >> mathematical expression to sumti."
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What is the unevaluated expression "2+2" ? I think it's "2+2". That
>> >> >> leads me to believe that the unevaluated expression "b" is "b", even
>> >> >> if b has the value, say, 4, in which case its evaluated expression
>> >> >> is
>> >> >> "4" and not "b".
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Yes, the unevaluated expression "b" is "b", however, it is the
>> >> > VARIABLE
>> >> > "b",
>> >> > NOT the LETTER "b". We're talking about mathematics here. Math
>> >> > doesn't
>> >> > have
>> >> > letters. It has constants, variables, and operations. Things
>> >> > REPRESENTED
>> >> > by
>> >> > letters are VARIABLES.
>> >>
>> >> Sure, but what matters is the result, no? If I say "write the
>> >> unevaluated expression 'b'" and I get a "b" on a piece of paper, and
>> >> that's what I wanted to happen, then I've succeeded, haven't I?
>> >
>> >
>> > I would say no, because a variable is a symbol which represents a
>> > numeric
>> > value, possibly unknown, most likely changing according to
>> > circumstances,
>> > even possibly imaginary, but a value nonetheless, whereas a letter
>> > represents a phoneme. While it is true that the symbols for both /can/
>> > be
>> > the same, it is not true that they represent the same thing. Regardless
>> > of
>> > which, /you don't need to use me'o at all/. {.i ko ciska me'o by.} Means
>> > "You! write the mathematical expression 'b'." {.i ko ciska by.} means
>> > "You!
>> > write the letter 'b'."
>> >
>>
>> I think that taking a look at the CLL might clear things up, as arpis
>> mentioned.
>> Chapter 17 section 10 example two clearly demonstrates use of me'o for
>> denoting letters.
>> Furthermore, pure use of quotations is definitely incorrect, as
>> evidenced in examples four and five.
>>
>> >>
>> >> Regardless, in a 100% lojbanic environment, the listener would just
>> >> write {by} on the paper if I told em/them/him/her {.i ko ciska me'o by
>> >> lo papri}.
>> >
>> >
>> > In any environment where you told someone to write the variable b, they
>> > would would place a vertical line with a connecting closed loop at the
>> > bottom to the right. It's not a Lojbanic-specific thing.
>> >
>>
>> You're wrong. I'm definitely not dreaming when I'm saying that the
>> variable b in Lojban is {by}. As you must already know, {b} by itself,
>> in Lojban, is a cmevla, and even though I'm stating what's blatantly
>> obvious here, cmevla are not "mathematical expressions" by ANY
>> stretch.
>>
>> >>
>> >> Looking at the definition of {lerfu}, the gimste seems to suggest that
>> >> a letter can be referred to with {la'e zo BY}. Is it thus the case
>> >> that {la'e zo by ce'o abu ce'o...} (which is redundant to {la'e lo'u
>> >> by abu ... le'u}) is the correct way to give a letter list?
>> >
>> >
>> > No. {zo} only quotes one word. It would either be {la'e zo by. ce'o lu
>> > .abu
>> > li'u ce'o ...} or possibly {la'e lu by. .abu ... li'u}. And I'm not
>> > saying
>> > either are "correct", except in a grammatical sense.
>> >
>> I now notice that I forgot some {zo} (and lu..li'u).
>> I think you fail to understand my understanding of lo'u..le'u which
>> I'm almost certain I've explained: {lo'u by cy dy le'u} == {zo by ce'o
>> zo cy ce'o zo dy}.
>
>
> No. lo'u ... le'u is not equivalent to a string of zo-quotes placed in a
> sequence using ce'o. It is equivalent to a single lu .. li'u qutoe, except
> that the internal contents only need to be in Lojban, they do not need to be
> grammatical.
>
That's one way to see it. A grammatical quote differs fundamentally
from a multi-word quote in that inside a grammatical quote, the words
actually interact. {lo'u a bu le'u} is fundamentally different from
{lu a bu li'u}. Inside the lu-quote, bu is actually a magic word,
unlike when inside a lo'u-quote (check in jbofi'e, I'm not kidding
you).

Regardless, I wasn't asserting that a lo'u...le'u quote be equivalent
to a sequence of zo-quotes; I was simply telling you that's how I see
it, considering that pretty much any other interpretation of it fails.
In fact, the CLL in that aforementioned chapter, uses a lu-quote to
quote {abu} rather than a lo'u-quote. I presume that it's for the very
good reason that {bu} is not magical inside a lo'u-quote.

>>
>> Using {la'e lu abu by cy li'u} is wrong on a different level, because
>> inside a lu..li'u words INTERACT with each other, such that all those
>> BY (and ABU) compound to form one variable.
>
>
> I fail to see how "the referent of 'b a r d a'" is wrong on /any/ level, but
> it's not a moot point, because I wasn't suggesting that it's the correct way
> to do things, but merely that it's GRAMMATICAL.
>

Like I've said it already, the lu-quote produces one meaningful lump
of text, whereas the lo'u-quote produces a sequence of words. Inside a
lu-quote, words get parsed and INTERACT with each other (I dreadfully
feel like I'm repeating myself). This causes all the BY to collide and
form ONE SINGLE VARIABLE. Because we want to get at the individual
letters, allowing them to merge as such is undesired. Therefore, using
a lu-quote is unuseful for this purpose.

As it apparently wasn't clear, the level on which {la'e lu by abu ry
dy abu li'u} is wrong is a SEMANTIC level. Obviously, it's grammatical
-- I never argued that point.

>>
>> >>
>> >> And, I think I should mention that you haven't answered my question.
>> >> How would you give a letter list? It's good and well to tell everyone
>> >> that they're wrong, but if you suggest no solutions, I'm afraid you're
>> >> only being unproductive.
>> >
>> >
>> > I have answered your question. That you haven't seen it is not my fault.
>> >
>> If by "answered" you're that semantically incorrect use of {tadji},
>> then no, you haven't answered it at all. You've told me my solutions
>> are no good, and I've thus made more. I have yet to see you
>> reciprocate that behaviour.
>
>
> No, by answered I mean my responses to what you have said.
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >> mu'o mi'e la tsani
>> >>
>> >> > --
>> >> > mu'o mi'e .aionys.
>> >> >
>> >> > .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
>> >> > (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > 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.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > mu'o mi'e .aionys.
>> >
>> > .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
>> > (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> mu'o mi'e .aionys.
>
> .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
> (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
>
> --
> 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.