From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Mon Sep 17 00:31:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 17 Sep 2001 07:31:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 72062 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2001 00:44:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 17 Sep 2001 00:44:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta05-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.45) by mta3 with SMTP; 17 Sep 2001 00:44:26 -0000 Received: from andrew ([62.255.40.6]) by mta05-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.00 201-229-121) with SMTP id <20010917004424.NQNG20588.mta05-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew> for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 01:44:24 +0100 Reply-To: To: Subject: RE: [lojban] A revised ce'u proposal involving si'o Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 01:43:40 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <3d.1166af59.28d5bd70@aol.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" pc: > a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com writes: > > > There indeed must be a way for a bridi to function as a sumti (tho it's > > > unclear to me why there must be a way for a bridi to function as a > > > selbri, which is what NU gives us), but the only NU that is indispensible > > > is du'u kei be zi'o. All other NU could be replaced by other selbri > > > with a du'u kei be zi'o sumti. > > > > A mysterious paragraph. Are you sure of it? > > Yes. I can't see any snages. > > How does it work? What, for example, replaces {ni} or (this is > apparently crucial) {si'o}? I think a chart for all the NU is called for. All NU construct a predicate based on a bridi. The general strategy of paraphrasing NU-lessly is to express that bridi as a lodu'u sumti that is a sumti of a selbri synonymous with the NU. ni1 = x1 is the degree to which x2* is the case; x1 is the degree to which the world would have to change for x2 to not be the case ni2 = lo du'u broda BAI ma kau [where BAI is the amount BAI] si'o1 = x1 has the idea of x2* being the case [I don't know quite what you think si'o should mean, so read that as an indication of a paraphrase strategy only] x2* is what could be filled by tu'odu'u kei (be zi'o). I could try to assemble a chart of all such paraphrases, but in a sense any decent definition of a NU's semantics is going to be tantamount to one of these paraphrases. --And.