Re: [lojban] On the meanings of the causal gismu

My two cents:

On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Ilmen <ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com> wrote:

• jalge = x1 (action/event/state) is a result/outcome/conclusion of antecedent x2 (event/state/process). —— Also: x2 gives rise to x1 (= selja'e for reordered places); total (general meaning, but also = mekyja'e, pi'irja'e, sujyja'e).
• rinka = x1 (event/state) effects/physically causes effect x2 (event/state) under conditions x3. —— x1 is a material condition for x2; x1 gives rise to x2.
• banzu = x1 (object) suffices/is enough/sufficient for purpose x2 under conditions x3.
• bapli = x1 [force] (ka) forces/compels event x2 to occur; x1 determines property x2 to manifest. —— Also constrains; requires success, unlike the physics term (better expressed by danre).
• danre = x1 (force) puts pressure on/presses/applies force to x2. |>>> Agentive press/depress (= da'ergau, da'erzu'e).

— What is the semantic difference between {selja'e}, {rinka} and {bapli}? Does {selja'e} express a weaker relation than that expressed by {rinka}?

I tend to treat selja'e as a vaguer version of rinka/krinu/nibli/mukti . It also encompasses things like "lo nu ga'orgau lo ckule cu jalge lo nu lo ckule kamni cu jdijmaji" It wasn't the meeting's motive, cause, reason, or entailment to close to the school, but nonetheless, it was the outcome.

— The notes of {rinka} say it is a material condition; however, a true logical material condition (ganai...gi...) does not express any causal/physical relationship (if I'm not mistaken), which seems to contradict the main definition of {rinka}. So, does {rinka} entails a causal relationship?

rinka is a "material condition", which is not the same as "material conditional" (ganai ... gi) Material here does indeed mean a physical cause (cf. the way Karl Marx uses "material conditions") So "He hit her, so she fell down" would use rinka. So would "It was a hot day, so the fields dried up".

— Is {danre} the right word for the physics notion of "force"? If so, what {bapli} is all about?

Bapli does not imply a force in the physics notion. It's more like in the sense of "a force of nature". e.g. "He forced the banker to tell him the combination of the safe" "the heavy flow of water forced the dam to break" (hence the synonym 'compel')

— Which of the three below meanings should {banzu} have? (All of the below meanings are used in actual usage, making {banzu} a polysemous predicate.)
1) That x1 happens is a sufficient condition for x2 to happen.
2) The amount x1 (ni) is great enough for x2 to happen.
3) The amount of x1 having property x2 is great enough for x3 to happen.

#1 parallels {sarcu} and seems redundant to {rinka}; #2 is the same thing as {banzuni}; #3 parallels the meaning/usage for {dukse}, and sometimes {banzuka} is used for this meaning.

There is a reason the x1 says "(object)". For example "lo smuci cu banzu lo ka lo pinfu cu kakpa fo ce'u ja'e lo nu rivli'a" ("the spoon was sufficient for the prisoner to dig with to escape"). I opine you might be able to use #2, also.

Any thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Best regards, Ilmen.

--
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.