Subject: RE: [lojban] The Pleasures of goi (was: zipf computations & experimental cmavo

From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 18:40:41 -0400

At 02:14 PM 10/1/01 +0100, And Rosta wrote:
>#ii) is not something we designed
>#ko'a to be used for, if I understand what you mean by it. If I wanted to
>#assign a cmene, I would not use goi, but rather ko'a noi se cmene [name]
>#(or ne me'e [name])
>
>I think in this respect you're atypical of lojbanists. My sense is that 
>there's
>nothing unorthodoz about using goi to assign a reference to a name, e.g.
>"le nanmu goi la djoblogz".

I haven't ever seen that, but then I have to admit I read little Lojban 
text these days.

>And whether or not I'm right about that, there is a distinction between
>*claiming* (i.e. truly or falsely), using noi and ne, that X is called Y, and
>*assigning* referent X to name Y (i.e. performatively decreeing that
>X is called Y).

There is a distinction, BUT wrt names, the fact that the place structure of 
cmene includes a place for those who use the name for the referent somewhat 
obviates the difference. The difference between assigning a name to 
something and truthfully claiming that I am using a name for something is 
less than clear (obviously a false claim would not, but if one would 
falsely claim to be using a particular name for something, one might well 
assign a name that one intends to use for some other referent).

lojbab
--
lojbab [email-masked]
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