WikiDiscuss

WikiDiscuss


posts: 2388

Boy, are these definitions in English (and only sllightly less so in Lojban) opaque. Why not just say "is *number* in number," "is the *number*th member of X2 according to ordering X3" and so on?
While you are dropping (on another thread) superfluous places, the probbability place in {pacna} is a natural to go, since it has no place in a concept that can reasonably be correlated with "hope."

posts: 1912


pc:
> Boy, are these definitions in English (and only sllightly less so in Lojban)
> opaque. Why not just say "is *number* in number," "is the *number*th member
> of X2 according to ordering X3" and so on?

Good point, thank you. The reason for the somewhat opaque definitions is
that I want them to apply not just to the {number MOI} construct but also
to the {ME sumti MOI} one. But I can give both the restricted definition
for numbers as well as the general one for any sumti.

> While you are dropping (on another thread) superfluous places, the
> probbability place in {pacna} is a natural to go, since it has no place in a
> concept that can reasonably be correlated with "hope."

Yes, I always thought that place of {pacna} was funny for the "hope" gloss.
In Spanish, "esperar" means both "to hope" and "to expect" (it also
means "to wait" but that's not relevant here) so I suppose someone thought
that {pacna} in Lojban could also cover both. But if so, they should have
used "expect" as the keyword. A place for an expectation value is useful
to have, but I agree that mixing it with hope/wish/desire just doesn't
make any sense. And I don't see why {pacna} has to encroach like
that into {djica} territory either.

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


posts: 152

On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 03:32:47PM -0700, Jorge Llamb?as wrote:
> > While you are dropping (on another thread) superfluous places, the
> > probbability place in {pacna} is a natural to go, since it has no place in a
> > concept that can reasonably be correlated with "hope."
>
> Yes, I always thought that place of {pacna} was funny for the "hope" gloss.
> In Spanish, "esperar" means both "to hope" and "to expect" (it also
> means "to wait" but that's not relevant here) so I suppose someone thought
> that {pacna} in Lojban could also cover both. But if so, they should have
> used "expect" as the keyword. A place for an expectation value is useful
> to have, but I agree that mixing it with hope/wish/desire just doesn't
> make any sense. And I don't see why {pacna} has to encroach like
> that into {djica} territory either.

I think that the probability place of {pacna} is useful, and that the fault is
in "hope" being the keyword. There are other cases of misleading keywords in
the gismu list.
--
Rob Speer



posts: 1912


Rob Speer:
> I think that the probability place of {pacna} is useful, and that the fault
> is
> in "hope" being the keyword. There are other cases of misleading keywords in
> the gismu list.

I would agree, except that "hope" is not just the keyword, but the
whole definition as it is: "x1 hopes/wishes for/desires x2" when it should
be "x1 expects x2".

One problem with "fixing" this might be Nick's translation of
MLK's "I have a dream" speech, that uses {mi pacna} all over the
place.

mu'o mi'e xorxes






__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


posts: 2388

Since the ME + sumti are always going to evaluate to a number (though perhaps not very definitely), I don't see the need for the second version.

Jorge Llambías <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:

pc:
> Boy, are these definitions in English (and only sllightly less so in Lojban)
> opaque. Why not just say "is *number* in number," "is the *number*th member
> of X2 according to ordering X3" and so on?

Good point, thank you. The reason for the somewhat opaque definitions is
that I want them to apply not just to the {number MOI} construct but also
to the {ME sumti MOI} one. But I can give both the restricted definition
for numbers as well as the general one for any sumti.

> While you are dropping (on another thread) superfluous places, the
> probbability place in {pacna} is a natural to go, since it has no place in a
> concept that can reasonably be correlated with "hope."

Yes, I always thought that place of {pacna} was funny for the "hope" gloss.
In Spanish, "esperar" means both "to hope" and "to expect" (it also
means "to wait" but that's not relevant here) so I suppose someone thought
that {pacna} in Lojban could also cover both. But if so, they should have
used "expect" as the keyword. A place for an expectation value is useful
to have, but I agree that mixing it with hope/wish/desire just doesn't
make any sense. And I don't see why {pacna} has to encroach like
that into {djica} territory either.

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail




posts: 2388
Well, I think we need
hope
as a gismu since sorting it out as an analytic lujvo (about the only kind we see) is going to be a pain. I am not clear what notion vaguely in the
hope
-
want
space has a reasonable use for probability. It can be added to stress the forlornness of the hope, perhaps, but it really is an addition.


Rob Speer <rspeer@MIT.EDU> wrote:On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 03:32:47PM -0700, Jorge Llamb?as wrote:
> > While you are dropping (on another thread) superfluous places, the
> > probbability place in {pacna} is a natural to go, since it has no place in a
> > concept that can reasonably be correlated with "hope."
>
> Yes, I always thought that place of {pacna} was funny for the "hope" gloss.
> In Spanish, "esperar" means both "to hope" and "to expect" (it also
> means "to wait" but that's not relevant here) so I suppose someone thought
> that {pacna} in Lojban could also cover both. But if so, they should have
> used "expect" as the keyword. A place for an expectation value is useful
> to have, but I agree that mixing it with hope/wish/desire just doesn't
> make any sense. And I don't see why {pacna} has to encroach like
> that into {djica} territory either.

I think that the probability place of {pacna} is useful, and that the fault is
in "hope" being the keyword. There are other cases of misleading keywords in
the gismu list.
--
Rob Speer





posts: 1912


pc:
> Since the ME + sumti are always going to evaluate to a number (though perhaps
> not very definitely), I don't see the need for the second version.

{me mi moi} for example is "x1 is/are the one(s) among x2 that correspond(s)
to me by rule x3", in other words "x1 is/are my x2's by rule x3".

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


posts: 2388

?? So, this shows what (other than that we don't know — until we work through Rule 3 and my place — what the number is)?

Jorge Llambías <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:
pc:
> Since the ME + sumti are always going to evaluate to a number (though perhaps
> not very definitely), I don't see the need for the second version.

{me mi moi} for example is "x1 is/are the one(s) among x2 that correspond(s)
to me by rule x3", in other words "x1 is/are my x2's by rule x3".

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail




posts: 1912


> ?? So, this shows what (other than that we don't know — until we work
> through Rule 3 and my place — what the number is)?

There need not be any numbers involved. The rule might be "is the
one wearing it", then {ta memimoi lo mapku lo ka makau dasni ce'u}
"That's mine among hats by rule who's wearing it".

Of course in general the rule won't be given explicitly, and also
maybe not the x2: {ta medomoi}, "that's yours".

mu'o mi'e xorxes




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


posts: 2388

Can {moi} really do this? It is, of course, the original {me} (a baby's first Loglan was {memi}) and so a needed device, but it is hard to see it as an ordering. I gather though that the ordering part has here been reduce merely to a correlation with something or other, not necessarily an ordinal. I'm not convinced an the example given is so weird (unintelligible) that it doesn't help me out much.

Jorge Llambías <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:


> ?? So, this shows what (other than that we don't know — until we work
> through Rule 3 and my place — what the number is)?

There need not be any numbers involved. The rule might be "is the
one wearing it", then {ta memimoi lo mapku lo ka makau dasni ce'u}
"That's mine among hats by rule who's wearing it".

Of course in general the rule won't be given explicitly, and also
maybe not the x2: {ta medomoi}, "that's yours".

mu'o mi'e xorxes




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail




Re: BPFK Section: Numeric selbri
Boy, are these definitions in English (and only sllightly less so in Lojban) opaque. Why not just say "is *number* in number," "is the *number*th member of X2 according to ordering X3" and so on?
While you are dropping (on another thread) superfluous places, the probbability place in {pacna} is a natural to go, since it has no place in a concept that can reasonably be correlated with "hope."



posts: 2388

Since the ME + sumti are always going to evaluate to a number (though perhaps not very definitely), I don't see the need for the second version.

Jorge Llambías <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:

pc:
> Boy, are these definitions in English (and only sllightly less so in Lojban)
> opaque. Why not just say "is *number* in number," "is the *number*th member
> of X2 according to ordering X3" and so on?

Good point, thank you. The reason for the somewhat opaque definitions is
that I want them to apply not just to the {number MOI} construct but also
to the {ME sumti MOI} one. But I can give both the restricted definition
for numbers as well as the general one for any sumti.

> While you are dropping (on another thread) superfluous places, the
> probbability place in {pacna} is a natural to go, since it has no place in a
> concept that can reasonably be correlated with "hope."

Yes, I always thought that place of {pacna} was funny for the "hope" gloss.
In Spanish, "esperar" means both "to hope" and "to expect" (it also
means "to wait" but that's not relevant here) so I suppose someone thought
that {pacna} in Lojban could also cover both. But if so, they should have
used "expect" as the keyword. A place for an expectation value is useful
to have, but I agree that mixing it with hope/wish/desire just doesn't
make any sense. And I don't see why {pacna} has to encroach like
that into {djica} territory either.

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail




posts: 2388

?? So, this shows what (other than that we don't know — until we work through Rule 3 and my place — what the number is)?

Jorge Llambías <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:
pc:
> Since the ME + sumti are always going to evaluate to a number (though perhaps
> not very definitely), I don't see the need for the second version.

{me mi moi} for example is "x1 is/are the one(s) among x2 that correspond(s)
to me by rule x3", in other words "x1 is/are my x2's by rule x3".

mu'o mi'e xorxes





__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail




posts: 2388

Can {moi} really do this? It is, of course, the original {me} (a baby's first Loglan was {memi}) and so a needed device, but it is hard to see it as an ordering. I gather though that the ordering part has here been reduce merely to a correlation with something or other, not necessarily an ordinal. I'm not convinced an the example given is so weird (unintelligible) that it doesn't help me out much.

Jorge Llambías <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:


> ?? So, this shows what (other than that we don't know — until we work
> through Rule 3 and my place — what the number is)?

There need not be any numbers involved. The rule might be "is the
one wearing it", then {ta memimoi lo mapku lo ka makau dasni ce'u}
"That's mine among hats by rule who's wearing it".

Of course in general the rule won't be given explicitly, and also
maybe not the x2: {ta medomoi}, "that's yours".

mu'o mi'e xorxes




__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail