From lojbab@lojban.org Tue Apr 17 15:52:30 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 17 Apr 2001 22:52:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 56241 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2001 12:30:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 17 Apr 2001 12:30:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-3.cais.net) (205.252.14.73) by mta1 with SMTP; 17 Apr 2001 12:30:54 -0000 Received: from bob.lojban.org (231.dynamic.cais.com [207.226.56.231]) by stmpy-3.cais.net (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f3HCUqj46254 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 08:30:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010417083008.00c01d90@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: vir1036/pop.cais.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 08:34:13 -0400 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Three (4) more questions In-Reply-To: <14.12a0da6c.280cb270@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" At 04:39 PM 04/16/2001 -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 4/16/2001 9:23:45 AM Central Daylight Time, >biomass@hobbiton.org writes: > mean what it means? How do the two terms >connect, and why would it mean only one word? What's the real >difference between a brivla and a selbri, then? I mean, >is lo valsi, isn't it?> > >Skipping a long story of sloppy communication and mutual misunderstandings >and misapplied technical terms (in short, the history of Loglan/Lojban >technical terminology), this is a hard one to answer -- and the tale is too >long for even a face-to-face. And it is probably too late to try to do it >all over again right, but a brief attempt may be ok. {bridi} means >"predication," a predicate-centered construction that can be asserted, >questioned, applied as a description and so on. At the center of a >predication is, obviously, a predicate, which may be expressed in one or >several words and with a variety of auxiliary devices. A one-word predicate >is a brivla (actually, as the list notes, a selbrivla) and it keeps that >status even when it is combined into a more complex predicate in a >predication. Furthermore, a brivla standing alone constitutes a valid bridi, so it works in the sense of "bridi-in-one-word" as well as with your longer explanation. > The predicate of a predication is (automatically) a selbri, >whatever it is made up of -- one word, several in an unmarked structure, or >in a structure of whatever complexity. And no, {nu prenu kei} is not a valsi >but a valsi porsi (porsi lo valsi). It is a potential selbri, though not a >functional one as given, but it is not a brivla, since not a valsi. On the other hand, it does constitute "lo valsi" if one allows for the fact that unmarked-number is not necessarily singular. Still, most people tend to think in terms of singular usages. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org