From lojban-out@lojban.org Thu Jan 23 15:45:48 2003 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 23 Jan 2003 23:45:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 89053 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2003 23:45:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 23 Jan 2003 23:45:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 23 Jan 2003 23:45:47 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 18br2Y-0002vE-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:45:46 -0800 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18br2S-0002uv-00; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:45:40 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:45:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp189.chch.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.237.189] helo=dave ident=0) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 18br2L-0002ul-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:45:33 -0800 Received: from mbays.homelinux.org (IDENT:1001@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dave (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h0NNk9AZ016141 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:46:09 GMT Received: from localhost (martin@localhost) by mbays.homelinux.org (8.12.4/8.12.4/Submit) with ESMTP id h0NNk5OQ016138 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:46:05 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: mbays.homelinux.org: martin owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:46:04 +0000 (GMT) X-X-Sender: martin@mbays.homelinux.org To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: loi preti be fi lo nincli zo'u tu'e In-Reply-To: <20030123191025.GA1942@digitalkingdom.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 3871 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: mbaysATfreeshellDOTorg@flibble.org Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Martin Bays From: Martin Bays Reply-To: mbaysATfreeshellDOTorg@flibble.org X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 01:33:18PM +0000, Martin Bays wrote: > > coi ro do > > > > .i mi jinvi le du'u .aunai .ii ro'a bigmli le nu ninpengau fi mi > > coi la maten. .i .a'o do nelci le dei ve cusku > coi la robn. .i xamgu fa le nu vi zgana do .i'u > > .i le pu'u mi mi'e. maten. cilre fi la lojban. masti li so'u > > stidi lo'u cu masti le'u > drani .u'u .i do mi ba'o mulfa'igau le du'u lo si'o sucta se cusku to mu'u toi cu kakne lo nu seltau .i ki'e > > .ije ru'i manci le du'u ly. frica ro .a'ucu'i rarbau xokau da kei .e > > le du'u .io teva'u makau se finti > > "... and the fact (respect) of with what goodness standards the invented > thing.". > > milxe cfipu .i stidi lu nu finti li'u > .ie > > .i mi pu ze'a di'inai steci'a lo'i preti be le lojbo gerna tezu'e le > > nu lu'o ro do .e'oru'e .einaidai la'acu'i spuda so'u py .i semu'i bo > > mi bazi te preti fi so'e lo su'eso'umoi be py bei le ka cinri > > smadi le du'u do stidi zo mei .enai zo moi > .oi ro'e ckeji .i .ie > > .i le mi preti cu te bangu fi le .u'u .a'unai glibau mu'i le li'i > > terpa le nu na'e jmigau > > pe'u do na terpa mu'i le nu le do ga'u jbobau jufra cu mutce xamgu > mu'inai le milxe srera .iji'a .uisai barda .iji'a do so'iroi pilno le > cmavo be zo .ui .ui > .i .ui ki'e > > .i le preti zo'u zoi gy. > > > > Is a jek-connected tanru like {ricfu je ninmu} still a single selbri? > > And in that case, what is its place structure, given that {ricfu} and > > {ninmu} have quite different place structures? > > Yes, and: > > n1/r1 is a rich man who is wealthy in aspect r2 Oh dear, that's not what other people have been saying. And I'm not sure I like it either. Though I can see that cfujveni'u would have that place structure. > > > What's the difference between {LE broda pe BAI LE brode} and {LE broda > > be BAI LE brode}? > > The former is associated with BAI LE brode, which IMO doesn't make a lot > of sense in most cases, and the latter adds a BAI place containing LE > brode to the bridi wrapped up in the outer LE. > Yes, that's how I'd understood pe clauses, so I was very confused when I first saw a pe BAI construction. The distinction Pierre Abbat draws earlier in the thread is interesting, however (though I don't really see how it's derived from "normal" pe usage) > > The "imaginary journey" idea doesn't seem to make much sense for some > > FAhA cmavo, such as fa'a, to'o, zo'i. What does {fa'a broda} mean? > > broda occurs towards an unspecified place, i.e. between me and there. > > > Or indeed {fa'a mo'i broda}? > > broda occurs whilst moving towards an unspecified place. > > > How about {broda fa'a ko'a}? > > broda occurs between here and ko'a, most likely. Or pointing towards > it; not sure. > That makes sense, but it upsets the usual equivalence between {FAhA broda} and {broda FAhA mi}. I was hoping there might be some umbrella interpretation which covers all of FAhO in a unified kinda way. > > Is there any general rule for where events happens for the purposes of > > spatial tenses? For example, if I say {mi ca'u catlu}, as I understand > > it that means the {mi catlu} is true at a point in front of me. But > > does that mean I'm looking at something in front of me, or that > > (paradoxically) I'm in front of myself as I look, or what? > > Neither. It means that in front of you, you are a cat. Which is > incredibly silly. But AFAIK no observer is specified. Ummm... catlu, not mlatu. [Snipping interesting stuff] > > So > > li ma'o fy. pa jo'i re jo'i ci > > appears to work; this treats jo'i as infix, which may or may not be > correct. jbofi'e says no. [more snip] > > ce'o doesn't work in mex, nor do any of the set operators, which is > *insane*. I have *no* idea how to do set math in lojban. jo'i is > *certainly* not it. If I knew how to get JOI to work in mex, that would > be fixable, but I've no idea how to do that. If we can't make JOI work > in mex, then we either need to add set and sequence operations to mex, > or I'm going to throw my weight on the "mex are totally useless" side of > the argument. > Umm... you can have JOI connected operands (see e.g. CLL18.17.10)... whether this is an acceptable way of doing mathematical sequences I don't know, though I'd assumed it was. > As the only B.Math here, AFAIK, I'd like to think that my weight matters in > this case. 8) Give me a few months, and I'm afraid I'll be a BMath in all but name... and give me another year and I should be an MMath. And then I'll outrank you! Hee-hee. I have actually tried to do a little translation of logic/set theory stuff into lojban... but not without difficulty. And I found normal bridi more useful than mex - but then I haven't really fully absorbed that chapter yet. > > > > Are there exact rules for how overriding components of a pro-bridi > > works? e.g. in {da zo'u remna .i naku go'i} is the second sentence > > equivalent to {naku da zo'u remna} or {da zo'u naku remna}? > > As far as I'm aware, those are equivalent. > I don't think that's right - See CLL16.11.3/4 > > BTW, everybody, Martin is the one who fixed up my Inform engine. > Yes... though with only a couple of week's worth of grammar under my pate. I do intend to go back and make it all better, one of these days... --- #^t'm::>#shs>:#,_$1+9j9"^>h>" < v :>8*0\j" o'u" v" e'i" v".neta"^q> ;z,[; > > ^