From cowan@ccil.org Mon Feb 18 18:29:58 2002
Return-Path: <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
X-Sender: cowan@mercury.ccil.org
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_2); 19 Feb 2002 02:29:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 61341 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2002 02:29:57 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171)
  by m3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Feb 2002 02:29:57 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mercury.ccil.org) (192.190.237.100)
  by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Feb 2002 02:29:56 -0000
Received: from cowan by mercury.ccil.org with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
  id 16d02h-0005Fm-00; Mon, 18 Feb 2002 21:30:07 -0500
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies
In-Reply-To: <22.23e3f299.29a30535@aol.com> from "pycyn@aol.com" at "Feb 18,
  2002 08:32:37 pm"
To: pycyn@aol.com
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2002 21:30:07 -0500 (EST)
Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL66 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <E16d02h-0005Fm-00@mercury.ccil.org>
X-eGroups-From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
From: John Cowan <cowan@ccil.org>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=212516
X-Yahoo-Profile: johnwcowan

pycyn@aol.com scripsit:

> Only if we can agree how to say "\x.x*2" You seem not to like {le du'u makau 
> pilji ce'u li re} What is your choice?

I have two problems here: first of all, a 2-relation should be
"le ka ce'u ... ce'u", in this case "le ka ce'u pilji ce'u li re".
In English: the mapping between numbers and their doubles.
I agree that "du'u" will work as an alternative to "ka" here,
since we have explicit ce'us (the difference being that "du'u"
defaults to 0 ce'us, and ka to 1). But I see no reason to use makau.

Secondly, the referent of one of these sumti is the function, not
the rule of the function, so it goes in fancu1, not fancu4. The
fact that it specifies the function by rule is neither here nor
there: I don't know how to write bau la lojban. the fancu4 for the factorial
(or gamma) function, but I know there is such a rule, so
"le ve fancu la faktorial." would be a way to designate the rule.

Fancu4 is an *expression* (that is, a text or textoid).
I don't know how to say "\x.x*2" as a text, primarily because
I don't know how to MEX the dot.

-- 
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org
To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all. There
are no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language
that they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful.
--_The Hobbit_

