[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
I few quickies
- To: John Cowan <cowan@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>, Eric Raymond <eric@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>, Eric Tiedemann <est@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>, Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@SNARK.THYRSUS.COM>
- Subject: I few quickies
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <cbmvax!uunet!CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!shoulson>
- In-Reply-To: jimc%MATH.UCLA.EDU@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu's message of Wed, 4 Sep 1991 16:43:24 -0700
- Reply-To: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!LOJBAN>
- Sender: Lojban list <cbmvax!uunet!CUVMA.BITNET!pucc.PRINCETON.EDU!LOJBAN>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1991 16:43:24 -0700
From: jimc%MATH.UCLA.EDU@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
X-To: Lojban list <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
> First off, have we got a good way to say "light" (not in weight)?
I've been using se gusni (light x1 illuminates target x2 (converted)
source x3).
I hate that. You really need a thesaurus to get through the gismu list.
> Also, the gismu {fendi} is defined as "divide/partition...into...by
> method...." Here, we run into the ambiguity of using English as the
> metalanguage: If I pour water into two sides of a vessel separated by a
> barrier, am *I* the one who "divides" the water into two parts, or is it
> the partition?
In Old Loglan the policy was that [most] words were non-transitive, and
to get transitive meanings you were supposed to make a lujvo. In
today's vocabulary, zukte (x1 does x2 purpose x3) or rinka (x1 causes
x2 condition x3) are suitable main words for the lujvo, depending on
the meaning. Example:
fedyzu'e - fendu zukte - image of a person forcing himself into a crowd
to split it into parts.
I'm not positive I follow all this, or the ensuing discussion. It's
particularly difficult since even deciding for or against transitivity
doesn't help. F'rinstance: let's say we decide that {le fendi} is the
partition between {le te fendi}, not the actor who did the dividing. This
is a reasonable definition, since getting to the partition from the actor
would be tough. Now, what might we say to {fendr'ia} == fendi rinka?
Using Nick's usual reading of {-ri'a} to transitivize a predicate, a la
Esperanto "-ig", we get "divide-cause." Now. If I divide water on two
sides of a partition, have I "divide-cause"d the water, or the partition?
I caused one to be divided, and one to divide. Would the former be
{selfendri'a} and the latter {fendri'a}? Hmmm. Actually, that sounds
pretty good.
Oh, well. I'll probably post the first part of the translation I needed
this for today, so you can all work on it in context.
~mark