Subject: Re: [lojban] Practical cooperation 1: "is intended to be"

From: "Robert J. Chassell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 11:15:57 -0500 (EST)

la djan cusku di'e

> RAM (Robert McIvor, the new TLI CEO) has proposed cooperation ...

Great! 

> ... I propose to begin here.

> The problem: What's a good tanru/metaphor for the predicate 
> "x1 is intended (or supposed) to be x2 by the intention of x3"?

la xorxes cusku di'e

How about {te platu}?

I cannot remember TLO Loglan spelling, or how the apostrophe-less LLG Lojban
works, but leaving that aside, here is the definition from the LLG Lojban
gismu list:

* designs, 
x1 (agent) plans/designs/plots 
plan/arrangement/plot/[schematic] x2 
for state/process x3 
/:/ [also invents/organizes; x2 design, scheme; 
the structure or layout of an object 
would be represented as a state in x3]
/=/ platu (pla)

so {terpla} means

for state/process x1, 
plan/arrangement/plot/[schematic] x2 
is planned/designed/plotted by x3 (agent) 

if I was able to make the conversion OK. 

Given the problem:

"x1 is intended (or supposed) to be x2 by the intention of x3"?

this means that 

the x1 is a state or process; this is OK;
the x2 is a plan/arrangement/plot/[schematic]; this is OK, too;
the x3 is an agent, who does the plotting; this is somewhat OK.

The problem with {terpla} is that the agent is a planner or designer.

The proposal is for an entity who *intends*, but who will not
necessarily carry out the intention into an act of being a planner or
designer.

We need to incorporate one of the cmavo that suggest `not yet', or
`not necessarily'. such as {pu'o}, the `inchoative' event contour, or
perhaps {co'a}, the `initiative' event contour.

I don't remember how to do this in either TLI Loglan or in LLG Lojban. 

Nor do I remember how to remove the apostrophe from LLG Lojban, which
might make for what some would consider a `nicer looking' written
represention.

(The apostrophe and no-apostrophe variations of LLG Lojban can be
converted from one to the other by following rules; they are
fundamentally identical, differing only in their written represention.

(The problem is that the no-apostrophe variation requires remembering
more than the apostrophe variation and no one to my knowledge uses it.
I have always thought that TLI Loglanists would prefer it. Indeed, I
might prefer it myself, had I the ability to remember all the rules.)

Anyhow, this is a good beginning.

-- 
Robert J. Chassell [email-masked]
Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com