From pycyn@aol.com Sun Oct 14 07:49:03 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 14 Oct 2001 14:49:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 91146 invoked from network); 14 Oct 2001 14:49:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by 10.1.1.220 with QMQP; 14 Oct 2001 14:49:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m05.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.8) by mta3 with SMTP; 14 Oct 2001 14:49:03 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.8.) id r.cf.d05e162 (18709) for ; Sun, 14 Oct 2001 10:48:53 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 10:48:53 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] translation challenge: "If today is Monday..." To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_cf.d05e162.28faffd5_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_cf.d05e162.28faffd5_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/13/2001 11:58:20 AM Central Daylight Time, cowan@ccil.org writes: > Okay, I'll play the role of Socratic victim. What's wrong with: > > ro da poi djedi zo'u da se cmene zo pavdei > .ijo lo bavlamdei be da se cmene zo reldei/cibdei > For all days X, if X is named Monday, > then the successor-day of X is named Tuesday/Wednesday. > > In other words, it seems to me that the oddity of these sentences reflects > the fact that "today" and "tomorrow" are usually absolute in English, but > here are being applied as relative terms. "Bavlamdei" is actually relative > in Lojban, but is most often used (in a mildly malglico way) as absolute; > here we get to use it in the "proper" way. > Item 1> You didn't say "if" but "iff," which happens to be OK here, in fact, though not what was said/asked for. Item 2>"today", "tomorrow", etc. are token reflexive, i.e., get their references dependent upon when the occurrence of the word in question is uttered. I don't see exactly what is meant here by "relative" (other than "token-reflexive") and "absolute." This use is perfectly normal in English and Lojban. --part1_cf.d05e162.28faffd5_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/13/2001 11:58:20 AM Central Daylight Time, cowan@ccil.org writes:


Okay, I'll play the role of Socratic victim.  What's wrong with:

ro da poi djedi zo'u da se cmene zo pavdei
   .ijo lo bavlamdei be da se cmene zo reldei/cibdei
For all days X, if X is named Monday,
   then the successor-day of X is named Tuesday/Wednesday.

In other words, it seems to me that the oddity of these sentences reflects
the fact that "today" and "tomorrow" are usually absolute in English, but
here are being applied as relative terms.  "Bavlamdei" is actually relative
in Lojban, but is most often used (in a mildly malglico way) as absolute;
here we get to use it in the "proper" way.


Item 1>  You didn't say "if" but "iff," which happens to be OK here, in fact, though not what was said/asked for.
Item 2>"today", "tomorrow", etc. are token reflexive, i.e., get their references dependent upon when the occurrence of the word in question is uttered.  I don't see exactly what is meant here by "relative" (other than "token-reflexive") and "absolute."  This use is perfectly normal in English and Lojban. --part1_cf.d05e162.28faffd5_boundary--