Wait a minute.... At the end of the included post Jorge makes a statement I find very wrong. He says he doesn't see a problem using kavbu for the phrase "caught a cold." I do not believe this is the concept behind kavbu, and I find it horribly malglico. You can certainly catch things unintentionally, like a bug in your mouth when it flys in. The problem I have is that a cold is not something you catch in concept, but rather something that invades or attacks you. "Catch a cold" is an idiom.
.karis
Karen Stein
Group: http://groups.google.com/group/lojban/topics
- Specifying sumti types: another revision of gimste is complete [3 Updates]
- Possession/transfer/exchange predicates [6 Updates]
Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> Jun 15 12:33PM +0400
Most important grammar words are now in "klesi B=Grammar word".
I removed most places from them. In order to express "language" places I
added {uenzi}="x1 is a text in language x2" (etymology: Chinese "wénzì")
since {bangu3} has to be specially treated to be converted into "text".
Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> Jun 15 02:53PM +0400
Other news. Semantic categorization. Any given tag can now be found not
more than in one column. So if you selected "Links" in "klesi C" you can
now be sure that you didn't miss other words with the same tag in other
coumns.
"Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com> Jun 15 10:28AM -0300
Looking at the places tagged as "plural":
simxu1 - OK
casnu1 - OK
jmaji1 - missing
porsi1 - I disagree.
rilti1 - no idea
fenso2 - OK
liste2 - OK
linji2 - OK
plita2 - OK?
sarni2 - ?
lanzu2 - since the definition is "including x2" then it doesn't have to be
a plural, "lo lanzu be mi", "my family".
gunma2 - missing
bakfu2 - missing (I think it should be a complete specification)
derxi2 - same
stura2 - same
trene2 - same
cecmu2 - same
bende2 - same
mixre2 - same
porsi3 - OK
snuji3 - OK
cuxna3 - OK
ciste3 - missing
pruce4 - OK
farvi4 - OK
pluta4 - OK
kruvi4 - OK?
mu'o mi'e xorxes
"Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com> Jun 14 02:29PM -0300
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 4:27 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> that the gismu list makes the "pedantically"comment.
>> With the "property as a location" metaphor, used for example in denpa3
> done. denpa3 =property of x1
I notice that you have left only properties in most of the possession
places, but I think that's wrong. The property-as-possession metaphor
should be the secondary meaning, not the main one. The main meaning should
be for the concrete possession. And the same should apply to the
property-as-location metaphor. "dunda lo plise" is the basic sense, "dunda
lo ka ponse lo plise" is a derived abstraction. "denpa fi lo panka" is the
basic sense, "denpa fi lo ka zvati lo panka" is a derived abstraction.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> Jun 14 09:53PM +0400
As of now I suggest that we have the following types:
1. "numeral"
2. "thing" (can be an object, an event but not a property). "thing" doesn't
interact with other te sumti of the same brivla.
3. "property" (can have ce'u or may have ce'u omitted, thus it can always
include "thing")
4. other subtypes of "thing": "sound", "text"
As of "located" it is to be replaced either with "property" of with "thing"
where appropriate.
>> done. denpa3 =property of x1
> I notice that you have left only properties in most of the possession
> places, but I think that's wrong.
Well, do you mean that there might be places that allow only "property" but
not a "located"?
> The property-as-possession metaphor should be the secondary meaning, not
> the main one.
I don't distinguish secondary and main meanings.
> The main meaning should be for the concrete possession.
Then why not just state that our ad hoc term "property" denotes a place
where the main meaning is a non-{ce'u} place, and the secondary is a
{ce'u}-place?
And the same should apply to the property-as-location metaphor. "dunda lo
"Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com> Jun 14 04:12PM -0300
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
wrote:
> As of now I suggest that we have the following types:
> 1. "numeral"
A numeral is a thing, and the abstraction it represents is a number.
zoi ke 5 ke cu nacle'u
"5" is a numeral.
li mu cu namcu
Five is a number.
> 2. "thing" (can be an object, an event but not a property). "thing"
> doesn't interact with other te sumti of the same brivla.
But a brivla always expresses a relationship among all of its sumti.
Besides, even if we are talking about interactions with property arguments,
the places for the thing-with-property will normally be places for things.
How could we say that ckaji1 doesn't interact with ckaji2?
3. "property" (can have ce'u or may have ce'u omitted, thus it can always
> include "thing")
By "omitted" do you mean not stated explicitly, or not present even
implicitly? If you mean the first, that's fine, we can say that "lo ka ce'u
broda" and "lo ka broda" both refer to the same property even though "ce'u"
is omitted in the second one. But you must mean something else. Are you
saying that "lo plise" is a property with "ce'u" omitted?
I notice that you have left only properties in most of the possession
>> places, but I think that's wrong.
> Well, do you mean that there might be places that allow only "property"
> but not a "located"?
ckaji2 would be the prime candidate for that. There are lots of places that
have traditionally been considered to be only for properties (mutce2,
simlu2, etc.) I can see how these too could be repurposed, but that's a
whole new discussion.
The property-as-possession metaphor should be the secondary meaning, not
>> the main one.
> I don't distinguish secondary and main meanings.
I meant we should not throw away the basic meanings in favor of more
abstract extensions. It doesn't matter whether we call the extension
secondary or not, it should not annihilate the original source meaning.
The main meaning should be for the concrete possession.
> Then why not just state that our ad hoc term "property" denotes a place
> where the main meaning is a non-{ce'u} place, and the secondary is a
> {ce'u}-place?
But then wouldn't you be losing track of your original purpose for doing
this? Wouldn't it be misleading to use "property" in a way that doesn't
match the usual sense of that word?
mu'o mi'e xorxes
"Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com> Jun 14 04:38PM -0300
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>
wrote:
> zoi ke 5 ke cu nacle'u
> "5" is a numeral.
> Actually... The Lojban is true, but the English should read "digit", not
"numeral", "55" is a numeral too, but it's not a digit. "nacle'u" is
"digit", and "nacysni" is better for "numeral".
mu'o mi'e xorxes
Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> Jun 15 12:29PM +0400
Okay, for most possession ralbrivla I added "located" back, changed djeni4
to "property of x1".
Should kavbu2 be a property too ("I caught cold")?
All possession ralbrivla are under "klesi B Action. Possesion
interactions". Please inform if I missed any.
So we have
1. number
2. property but not located
3. located but not property.
4. subtypes
So if we see any property place that can take a value which would never
interact with other places then a "located" should be added as a possible
type to it.
The same for "located". If it can interact with other places then it is
also a "property" (or only a "property").
>> As of now I suggest that we have the following types:
>> 1. "numeral"
> A numeral is a thing, and the abstraction it represents is a number.
Sorry, then it should be
1. "number"
> But then wouldn't you be losing track of your original purpose for doing
> this? Wouldn't it be misleading to use "property" in a way that doesn't
> match the usual sense of that word?
for me "property" is a place that can interact with other places with
{ce'u}.
"Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com> Jun 15 09:37AM -0300
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 5:29 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Should kavbu2 be a property too ("I caught cold")?
I don't see why not. Most of the gloss words suggest kavbu2 is something
that kavbu1 acquires intentionally, but "catch" can be unintentional.
Presumably when kavbu2 is a property, kavbu3 would be one as well.
mu'o mi'e xorxes