From lojban-out@lojban.org Sun Sep 29 08:57:21 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 29 Sep 2002 15:57:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 67501 invoked from network); 29 Sep 2002 15:57:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 29 Sep 2002 15:57:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Sep 2002 15:57:20 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17vgUO-0004BM-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 09:00:12 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17vgTo-0004B0-00; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 08:59:36 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sun, 29 Sep 2002 08:59:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17vgTj-0004Ar-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 08:59:31 -0700 Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (asdf@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g8TG3fGZ051202 for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 11:03:41 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from fracture@cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com) Received: (from fracture@localhost) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g8TG3feE051201 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 11:03:41 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 11:03:41 -0500 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: paroi ro mentu Message-ID: <20020929160341.GB50774@allusion.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 1715 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: fracture@allusion.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Jordan DeLong From: Jordan DeLong Reply-To: fracture@allusion.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out --24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 12:02:03AM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote: > la and cusku di'e >=20 > >1. The general rule doesn't apply when, say, {e} is within the > >scope of {na}. So it can't be taken for granted that it applies > >to the present instance. >=20 > I used the case of {e} because it seemed to me to be more intuitive > than {ro}. Of course {e} and {ro} are equally affected by things > with scope. I believe {broda ko'a e ko'e} should always > expand as {broda ko'a ije broda ko'e}, and if that > holds, then {paroi ro mentu} has to mean "once per minute". Huh? How's that? Expansion of {e} has nothing to do with {ro mentu}. > >2. For {ci roi le pavdei ku joi le reldei} and {ci roi lei re djedi}, > >I would like to be sure that there is some way to say that the > >three occasions are distributed throughout the two days, such > >that {ci roi le pavdei} and {ci roi lei pa djedi} would be false. > >If that is doable, then my reservations would be assuaged. >=20 > I don't understand why you want that. If {ciroi le jeftu} is > true, it can also be true that {ciroi le pavdei}. Similarly for > {ciroi lei ze djedi}, and {ciroi lei re djedi}. >=20 > >So what do these mean? > > > >ci roi ku ca re djedi > > -- three occasions, each occurring over two days > >ca re djedi ku ci roi > > -- occurring on two days, thrice on each day > > > >Is that right? >=20 > That's what I would like, yes. The other possibility is that > they both mean the second, if tags never have scope over > following terms, but I don't see the advantage of that. No one is debating that tags have scope over following terms. The question is whether they have scope over a sumti contained in the *same* term. When you say "ciroi ku", you have made a full term; there's no debate on this because the book clearly says that each full term has scope over all the terms to the left of it, unless you override it with termsets. I think you missed his use of "ku ca" maybe? Under either approach both of them mean exactly what And said. The question is what {ciroi re djedi} means. Under the left-to-right approach the following interpretation: ciroi re djedi three times in 2 days Yours is ciroi re djedi three times for each of two days > >Remind me what is to be gained by using roi + sumti rather > >than roi + ku? >=20 > That the sumti gives the exact interval in which the repetitions > occur, {ca} just gives an event with some overlap. I suppose > {ze'a ro mentu paroi} would work just as well as {paroi ro mentu}. I agree. Of course, as was likely And's intention to suggest, you *can* express either of the meanings which are being suggested for "paroi ro mentu" through seperate mechanisms. However I don't think there should much doubt of that for almost anything in lojban, so I'm not sure what his point was. --=20 Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u sei la mark. tuen. cusku --24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE9lyRcDrrilS51AZ8RAu2FAJ49GEFUke48Q0RGqZBp2gFgexMZhQCdEicV CeWLdLvXc0k8fBf/j/Be4O0= =Xl0y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9--