From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sat Aug 25 21:01:19 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 26 Aug 2001 04:01:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 10749 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 04:01:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 26 Aug 2001 04:01:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.91) by mta1 with SMTP; 26 Aug 2001 04:01:17 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 21:01:17 -0700 Received: from 200.69.11.208 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 04:01:17 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.69.11.208] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: mine, thine, hisn, hern, itsn ourn, yourn and theirn (was[lojban] si'o) Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 04:01:17 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Aug 2001 04:01:17.0658 (UTC) FILETIME=[C1DFCBA0:01C12DE3] From: "Jorge Llambias" la nitcion cusku di'e >Well then. I still think it's butt-ugly, but it's not as insane* as I first >thought. (For 'insane', read 'ill-motivated, capricious, and >unformalisable'.) Thanks! :) >Oh, one more thing? If this is how you do it, then I don't think sumti are >indexes, but quoted words are. No! It's the sumti. I don't wat to index Alice's hand with the word "Alice", I want to index it with the little girl who has a hand. (The indexing does not have to be one-to-one, btw. Just as there can be two 7ths, there can be two of Alice's hands.) >But {mi} am not a {tcita}; {zo mi} is >a {tcita}. No, {zo mi} is a tcita of you, but the thing used to single out what's yours is you, not the word {mi}. >Just like it's not {lo cimei} that's doing the labelling in {ci >moi}, but {li ci}, the abstraction. But {li ci} is not {zo ci}. The thing used to select is the number, not its name. >la .oslos. me [zo/le] gugdrnorge moi le'i trutca >leka ganai ce'u ny.moi vo'e vo'i gi ce'u trutca [la'eny./ny.] > >I don't know if that {leka ce'u se tructa} will work for "'ordinal' label >of this capital is the country of which this is the capital" --- >particularly with that nasty recursion I slipped in there with {vo'i}. If >it doesn't, xorxes, I think the responsibility is yours to find a >{ce'u}-expression that will; and only then can I accept this as a >legitimate expansion of {moi} (which I still won't use. :-) ). Because you >are not inimical to formalisation, I think you will... I'm certainly not inimical, on the contrary, I'm very much in favour. But I don't get what you're doing with the ganai...gi..., I would say: la oslos me le norgo moi lei tcadu le ka ce'u trutca makau Oslo is Norway-th among cities ordered (indexed) by whose capital they are. The point of the construction though is to avoid filling the x2 and x3. Otherwise we would just say {la oslos cu trutca le norgo}. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp