From lojbab@lojban.org Sun Sep 02 03:04:40 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 2 Sep 2001 10:04:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 26839 invoked from network); 2 Sep 2001 10:04:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 2 Sep 2001 10:04:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-2.cais.net) (205.252.14.72) by mta3 with SMTP; 2 Sep 2001 10:04:39 -0000 Received: from user.lojban.org (224.dynamic.cais.com [207.226.56.224]) by stmpy-2.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f82A4b080077 for ; Sun, 2 Sep 2001 06:04:37 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010902055242.00d8a7a0@pop.cais.com> X-Sender: vir1036@pop.cais.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2001 06:02:36 -0400 To: Subject: RE: [lojban] The Knights who forgot to say "ni!" In-Reply-To: References: <150.1de490.28be61bc@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" At 09:33 PM 8/29/01 +0100, And Rosta wrote: >On this issue, which I'm agnostic about, it seems plausible that >whoever wrote the definitions was (na'e mabla) incompetent I plead guilty. > and that >the intention was for jei to mean "whether" and ni to mean "how much". >There are examples in The Book that support these meanings. So it >is open to debate how binding the mahoste definitions should be seen >as being. Feeling exemplary and in a mood to be stomped on, my original concept of ni was something like lo rupnu be li panono cu ni le kosta cu kargu In other words it was a quantity or measurement of the bridi relationship. It may or may not be amenable to ce'u because it is not clear whether the x1 measures a particular place of the inner bridi e.g. lo mitre be li panonono cu ni mi klama le zarci, and there is no particular place that 1000 meters actually corresponds to (the route comes close but how one measures backtracking and looping could make things complex). As I think I've said before, jei was intended as a hook for eventual implementation of fuzzy logic. If it has an equivalent, it might be jei broda = ni le du'u broda cu jetnu, but that begs the question if we can't agree on what ni means. My stating these former intentions has little to do with what was said in the book. I didn't spend a lot of time reviewing that particular paper, alas. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org