[lojban-beginners] Re: tanru/lujvo for [name] type of thing?

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

la ian cusku di'e

> > Is x3 for tags that in a given observation could be applied
> > but are not?
>
> Yes, but not with the same brode (and not neccesarily the same velbo'e).

I meant, for a given fixed brode, what goes in x3? Is it any tag
that could be applied by the velbo'e but is not applied in
the given brode? For example, in my observation of an apple
and tag "apple", can the x3 be "not-an-apple", "orange",
"banana", "stalactite", etc.? Or, given that in my observation
all I did was distinguish "apple" from the rest, the rest is
necessarily "not-apple"?

> It's just a link I need to supply, so I can refer to the unmarked state. I 
> think I might want to supply a further place for the form (see a previous 
> post by me) of the observation. But I am not sure about that yet.

But is x3 the unmarked state or a tag for the unmarked state?
If a tag, is the tag unique (for a given observation)? If it is
unique, can it ever be anything but "not-x2"?

> > > > Another way of saying it might be:
> > > >
> > > > la saske cu pajni le du'u xukau jetnu enai le du'u xukau melbi
> > > > Science determines whether something is true, not whether it is
> > > > beautiful.
> > >
> > > Explain "pajni" ;-)
> >
> > What do you mean by "explain"? ;)
>
> Well, "pajni" takes for granted that someone can determine something. If 
> you want to explain how this determination is done, then you need to 
> describe it in a different more basic way.

"velbo'e" also takes for granted that someone can
determine something.

I might explain {pajni} as something like:

zo pajni zo'u ko'a lanli da zu'i pe ko'a gi'e jdice ko'e da


> > My sentence was just an attempt to translate your English.
> > You said "the operationally closed system observes the difference
> > of observations it can make vs. those it can not make". That
> > does not seem to correspond to your lojban, which seems to say
> > that "the system tags what it [further divide and then] tags [one side 
> > of], and it could but doesn't tag
> > what it can't [further divide and then] tag [one side of]".
>
> Look at the square brackets I put in your utterance (further does not 
> necessarily mean afterwards, it could also have happened before, the tense 
> is really unspecified).

But for a given x1, there is a tag in x2 and another tag in x3.
Is x3 just "not x2", or something else?

> Don't just translate velbo'e as observe. Look at what the lojban definition 
> says.
> The Sentence says: The closed system draws a difference and creates 2 
> sides.
> Side 1 gets marked. It is a space that the system can draw a distinction 
> in.
> Side 2 could also be marked (with a further observation). But this space is 
> something the system can not further observe in. We can say "the 
> unthinkable", but we can think (or say) the unthinkable.

So is x2 for the distinction made in x1, or for a distinction
that could be made by a new value of x1? If x2 is "true", what
further distinction can be made in the space so marked? What
tag goes in x3 in that case?

> luman zei nunzga does not just mean "See an apple and say Apple". I would 
> not need to define a new brivla to say that. luman zei nunzga means "I see 
> (or think about, or know, or can call by it's name... it's not limited to 
> seeing, and in System Theory hardly ever is used to explain seeing) many 
> things, I make a distinction and pick only part of those things, and call 
> this part by a name (e.g. Apple). I could have also picked the other part 
> to call by it's name (e.g "Not the Apple"), but I did not"

Ok, so we have:

le nu mi zgana le plise cu brode zo plise zo nalplise

{zo nalplise} is the only possible value for x3 given
{le nu mi zgana le plise} in x1 and {zo plise} in x2, right?

mu'o mi'e xorxes


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus