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

Re: [lojban] Should I quit learning Lojban?



Well, the "standard semantics" of Lojban makes the referents of all 'lo broda' expressions things in the operant sense,  "the salient node in the upward semilattice on the extension of {broda} under jest ) (part-whole)", so anything between all the brodas and a microscopic speck of broda goo, as the case requires.

The Nootka experience is directly relevant here, since what you got from sentences were, in Lojban, merely complex selbri, not bridi at all for lack of a  sumti.  Nootka is apparently a property or process language which can express complete sentences without a reference to things.  Add it to the list.


From: "Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG" <lojbab@lojban.org>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2013 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] Should I quit learning Lojban?

John E Clifford wrote:
> This is all getting very confusing to me; I either don't get the point
> of various comments or I don't see the relevance of them to what I think
> is the topic at hand (which long ago ceased to be about learning Lojban
> -- we ought to change the title).  Let try to sort some things out for
> my own benefit.
> SAEss is a late derivative (and probably the result of a
> misunderstanding) of SAEsl, a term Whorf apparently coined.  It happens
> that all of the ss languages are also sl, which reenforces the confusion.
> The fact that Lojban has adjectives and verbs and common nouns -- or
> doesn't -- is largely irrelevant to the question whether it is a SAE
> ("thing"), property, process or sensation language.

lo, loka lopu'u, and loli'i should be able to express these, respectively (and we have a few other abstractors as well.  Whether they semantically match the targeted languages is less clear.

I guess you might argue that sticking lo on a property, process, etc makes it grammatically a "thing", but I think that is an artifact of translating the expressions into English, where sumti become grammatical nouns or gerunds.  Nora has always looked at brivla as being more verblike than any other part of speech, with the various cmavo acting on the grammatical roles but not really changing the Lojban semantics (though again translating the semantics into English tends to invoke English parts of speech).

I am still remembering my efforts at translating Nootka, wherein I expressed entire sentences as complex tanru, never using any sumti at all.

> It can (more or
> less by design) reproduce the effects of all sorts of languages, but to
> do so, it must convert properties or processes or sensations into
> things.

No.  cmavo convert brivla into sumti or mexso or ..., but none of those are necessarily "things".

lojbab


-- Bob LeChevalier    lojbab@lojban.org    www.lojban.org
President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.