Re: [lojban] searching

This points to the reason for the "odd" place structure. If I say {mi sisku lo pavelseljirna}, it follows that I am claiming that there is a unicorn I am looking for, and hence that there is a unicorn. Which is not what is intended at all. So, in this case and a few others (not nearly enough to prevent problems, but enough to prevent looking for a good general solution), places were altered to give non-problematic places, at the cost of practical usage. The solution to allow just different kinds of sumti in places was never developed as much as it needed to be, although a lot of work was done with {djica} a few other problem cases.

From: Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2013 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [lojban] searching

If you defined it the other way, you wouldn't get quite the same thing by just attaching {poi}. Instead you could wind up looking for a definite shirt, rather than just "some green shirt". {da} wouldn't fix this either, because the quantifier would be in the wrong place. (That is, "I'm looking for {da poi crino}" is "There exists a green thing that I'm looking for"; the existential is outside the looking. To move it inside you would need an abstractor, which is exactly what gimste-sisku does.)

Ultimately I agree, {sisku} as currently defined is rather strange to consider as the primitive. It feels excessively abstracted from everyday life, even if it is occasionally rather compact/precise.

mi'e la latro'a mu'o

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:

Yeah, I wasn't looking for a "we should change lojban suck that..." sort of thing. I assumed there was some solution.

Just kind of sucks that it's very easy for me to say "I am looking for a green thing in my dresser" (mi sisku lo (ka?) crino lo seldacru). But for "I'm looking for my keys", I've either got to spend half the day spelling it all out, or I guess selkik's tanru works tolerably well "mi troci co zvafa'i lo mi ckiku"

I guess it just seems like an unfortunate definition for sisku given how easy it is to add an object-by-property aspect to the searching. i.e. "mi sisku lo creka poi crino" or even "mi sisku lo crino creka".

meh, it is what it is.

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com> wrote:

Little correction:

On 8 January 2013 12:08, Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Using Lojban as it is without changing anything, there is a convoluted
> way to use sisku as-is, like this:
> .i mi sisku lo ka lo mi ckiku cu zvati ce'u kei ro zo'e ne lo zdani

{ro zo'e ne lo mi zdani} distributes, which is bad, so we need to make
it into a mass/set:
{loi ro zo'e ne lo mi zdani} is better, but you could probably use {lo
zdani} outright as a sisku3, in which case you're considering the
house to be a mass/set of all the places within (because xorlo).

.i mi'e la tsani 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.