On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:40 AM, la .lindar.
<lindarthebard@gmail.com> wrote:
I
had an idea. Things can only move circularly in one of two directions.
Why not just use {carna fi li pa} and {carna fi li re}, or even {carna
fi lo pritu} and {carna fi lo zunle}?
From a completely unbiased standpoint, without any cultural knowledge, does that unambiguously indicate direction of rotation?
No, we'd need a frame of reference to establish which is which. Since carna doesn't have that place, it remains a small problem. We can assume, however, that by "right" we mean that the "top" of the rotating thing is moving right while simultaneously the "bottom" is moving left, if the object were looked at from a particular orientation- i.e. the frame of reference, which I'll dub the "face". For example, from the orientation of looking at a clock's "face", the 12 is the topmost number, and the 6 the bottommost, and so the imaginary circular planes the hands rotate within are moving "right".
Making the above assumption means we'd only have to establish what portion of the object is the "face".
Which way is "left"? Are we measuring from the bottom or the top?
I'd say to measure from the top. It's arbitrary which we choose, but we do have to consistently choose the same one to avoid confusion, hence the above assumptions.
Which way is the "first" rotation? Is that culturally neutral?