From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Mon Oct 01 07:32:27 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 1 Oct 2001 14:32:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 11753 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2001 14:32:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 1 Oct 2001 14:32:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3) by mta2 with SMTP; 1 Oct 2001 14:32:26 -0000 Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer); Mon, 1 Oct 2001 15:09:49 +0100 Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk with Novell_GroupWise; Mon, 01 Oct 2001 15:41:28 +0100 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2 Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 15:41:16 +0100 To: lojban Subject: [lojban] Re: The Pleasures of goi (was: zipf computations & experimental cmavo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline From: And Rosta Mark: #--- In lojban@y..., "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" wrote: #> At 01:39 AM 9/30/01 +0100, And Rosta wrote: #> >The possibility of goi-less ko'a is involved in only one of three key #> >arguments for asymmetric goi. The other arguments are (i) that no'u #> >serves the function of woldemarian symmetric goi, and (ii) that ko'a #> >may already have a referent, which you want to assign to a cmene, and #> >this must be distinguishable from assigning the referent of a cmene #> >to a recycled ko'a. # #Maybe you guys would like to see this, which I posted on the Wiki=20 #s.v. "goi'a" (http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?goi%27a):=20 [...] #I therefore propose that ''da'o'' be used to specify=20 #assymetry in ''goi'' and ''cei'' assignments. Whichever element is=20 #da'o-ed is considered to be cleared out and overwritten by the new=20 #value. This may well mean redefining ''da'o'', which I think=20 #currently means "undefine everything." For that meaning, I propose=20 '#'da'oda'o''. DAhO has the same grammar as UI, near enough, so it=20 #can be considered to attach to things. ''da'o'' outside of goi/cei=20 #will retain the meaning of undefining whatever it's attached to.=20=20 #This, I think, is a pretty small change, not really munging baseline=20 #badly, and certainly it accords with grammar. And I think it neatly=20 #solves several problems at once. ''--mi'e mark'' # #I second. DAhO is another example of a selma'o that should not=20 #exist. Apparently the only difference with UI is that ''da'onai'' is=20 #not allowed, but it has a very useful meaning: when you want to=20 #emphasize that you are __not__ undefining something. So, whenever it=20 #is pertinent, ''da'o'' should be moved to UI. --mi'e [xorxes] # #(end of quoting) # #What think you, And et al? I think that it allows us to say what we want unambiguously even with symmetrical/woldemarian goi. So it is a satisfactory solution. It's mildly distressing that the solutions we tend to find for our how-to-s= ay problems tend to involve the addition of ever more syllables and cmavo, but I suppose I should trust in divine providence to deliver unto us=20 great scads of zipfings when the time is right. --And.