Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 09:49:48 EST

In a message dated 2/17/2002 9:43:25 PM Central Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> > To remind yet one last time, it is important that the phrase used to refer 
> to 
> > the function in fancu4 not be the same one as is used in fancu1 or a 
> large 
> > portion (though not all, if the range and domain are included) of the 
> > information value is lost. "sin is the function from angles to [-1,1] 
> > computed by sin(x) = y." is not quite a tautology but only marginally 
> more 
> > informative.
> 
> I confess I have not read all the messages in this thread, but it
> seems clear to me that fancu1 is the function itself (which, not being
> linguistic, cannot appear directly in a sentence, but must be represented
> by a name of some sort), whereas fancu4 is a text, a lambda expression
> (such as '\x.x+1').
> 

Literally? That is, {lu ...... li'u}? Or {le du'u makau .... ce'u}? For 
the latter is a function, that is, the name of a function so representing a 
function in the text, and so not an expression.