From pycyn@aol.com Mon Sep 17 12:20:54 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 17 Sep 2001 19:20:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 86167 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2001 15:33:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Sep 2001 15:33:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r09.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.105) by mta3 with SMTP; 17 Sep 2001 15:33:11 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.7.) id r.5f.1af3db13 (3890) for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2001 11:32:48 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <5f.1af3db13.28d7719f@aol.com> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 11:32:47 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] A revised ce'u proposal involving si'o To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_5f.1af3db13.28d7719f_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_5f.1af3db13.28d7719f_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 9/17/2001 2:33:38 AM Central Daylight Time, a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com writes: > 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. Hmmm! I think that is a very fruitful insight for defining these critters, a clear development of what the lists hint at. I'm not sure it is going to be complete and I have a doubt or two about particular cases, but it needs to be developed as part of the general understanding of Lojban. Nice job! > > 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 > I think that this is more likely {jei}, if I remember my discussions with *B* of Peoria rokeach [not a totla blank at least] our leading fuzzyist. I also wonder if thesse two are the same. Is this one of the things that xorxes keeps trying to distinguish? If so, I never got it from what he said and I wonder if it has ever really been used -- although I can imagine someone saying something like it in a cond\fused sort of way. This looks like {ni} , what ??Steven Belknap?? would call the membership function value of broda vis a vis ... Except I think the x1 at least of broda needs to be there, and, of course, I am suspcious of {makau}, even though it seems right here. xorxes' pair both seem to be in this area somewhere, but I don't know just where. The {si'o} sketch is about as far as can be gone at the moment. Fleshing it out seems to be a long task. --part1_5f.1af3db13.28d7719f_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 9/17/2001 2:33:38 AM Central Daylight Time, a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com writes:


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.


Hmmm!  I think that is a very fruitful insight for defining these critters, a clear development of what the lists hint at.  I'm not sure it is going to be complete and I have a doubt or two about particular cases, but it needs to be developed as part of the general understanding of Lojban.  Nice job!


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

I think that this is more likely {jei}, if I remember my discussions with *B* of Peoria rokeach [not a totla blank at least] our leading fuzzyist.  I also wonder if thesse two are the same.  Is this one of the things that xorxes keeps trying to distinguish?  If so, I never got it from what he said and I wonder if it has ever really been used -- although I can imagine someone saying something like it in a cond\fused sort of way.

<ni2 = lo du'u broda BAI ma kau [where BAI is the amount BAI>
This looks like {ni} , what ??Steven Belknap?? would call the membership function value of broda vis a vis ...  Except I think the x1 at least of broda needs to be there, and, of course, I am suspcious of {makau}, even though it seems right here. xorxes' pair both seem to be in this area somewhere, but I don't know just where.

The {si'o} sketch is about as far as can be gone at the moment.  Fleshing it out seems to be a long task.
--part1_5f.1af3db13.28d7719f_boundary--