From rob@twcny.rr.com Thu Feb 28 18:00:55 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: rob@twcny.rr.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: unknown); 1 Mar 2002 02:00:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 19544 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2002 02:00:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m4.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Mar 2002 02:00:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailout6.nyroc.rr.com) (24.92.226.177) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Mar 2002 02:00:54 -0000 Received: from mail1.twcny.rr.com (mail1-1 [24.92.226.139]) by mailout6.nyroc.rr.com (8.11.6/Road Runner 1.12) with ESMTP id g2120ru09507 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2002 21:00:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from riff ([24.92.246.4]) by mail1.twcny.rr.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-59787U250000L250000S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2002 21:00:51 -0500 Received: from rob by riff with local (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16gcLs-0000eK-00 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2002 21:00:52 -0500 Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 21:00:52 -0500 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies Message-ID: <20020301020052.GC1846@twcny.rr.com> References: <12f.d394ae5.29b0218c@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <12f.d394ae5.29b0218c@aol.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.24i X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com From: Rob Speer Reply-To: rob@twcny.rr.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2572649 X-Yahoo-Profile: squeekybobo On Thu, Feb 28, 2002 at 07:13:00PM -0500, pycyn@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 2/28/2002 1:39:07 PM Central Standard Time, > jcowan@reutershealth.com writes: > > > > Abstractly speaking, yes. But in terms of syntax, "abu" is a > > pronoun (outside MEX) and can't be used for the letter "a". > > Inside ordinary MEX it is a variable, still not the letter "a". > > > > Then what the fatal fandango is the way to refer to the letter "a"? Or the > numeral "1", to get back to the point? {me'o abu} and {me'o pa} respectively. > > > Well, it sems to be evaluated (to 1, in fact), {li pa} is evaluated to 1. {me'o pa} is the expression "1", unevaluated. > but, having used and defended > some degenerate cases of equations before, I suppose I have to let this one > go as well. So, what is the numeral "1" OUTSIDE MEX? I don't know. What is the name "John" outside cmene? > > > Not even the "1" key on a keyboard? Like all those other guys that are > something with a {bu} tucked on the end? No system at all? Lots of people seem to have the impression that "bu" means a more abstract representation of a numeral or letteral. No. "bu" takes any Lojban word, regardless of whether it is a lerfu, and makes a lerfu out of it. There's a convention that if you take a lerfu and add "bu", you get some lerfu that resembles the one you started with - hence "vybu" is "w" - but this is not a rule. And the result of "bu" is always another lerfu, and when used alone lerfu are always pronouns (or variables). So "pabu" might be a variable named "1", but it is not the number "1". > <I would write n, > n', n'', ... as ny. ny.bu ny.bubu ... > (People who say "n double prime" should be dissected!)> > > I see, no system at all. Why {bu} of all things. And, I suspect this a > device for getting more {n}s, whatever they do, not the representation of the > application of the function represented by "'" to the number represented by > "n". I too believe that that is a misuse of {bu}. Those would not be primes; they would be unrelated variables represented by bizarre variations on the letter "n". > Aside from having no way to say "prime" in Lojban (the missing system strikes > again) , what is wrong with the short, accurate -- and easily counted -- > "double prime" and so on? It sure beats sounding like a three-week-old -- > or, more likely, the parent of one. "Prime" could be {na'u selyli'e}, but since this is quite verbose I think there would be a case for an experimental cmavo. -- la rab.spir noi sarji me'o gy ubu my ry ibu