Re: {sorcu} definition

["Robert J. Chassell" <bob@GRACKLE.STOCKBRIDGE.MA.US>]

   > Thus, if
   > you are living in a breathable atmosphere, as on large parts of the
   > surface of the Earth, you do not need to store air.

   Right, because your air supply seems infinite. You can say that the
   atmosphere is our supply/reserve of air. No relevant container.

Ha!  Memories of youth.  I read "Off on a Comet" by Jules Verne.  The
characters in the story get scooped up by a passing comet/planetoid
with a breathable atmosphere.  I thought this was wonderful and it set
me to day dreaming.  I figured out how long the atmosphere would last
for a relatively small (~5 mile diameter) planetoid with an Earth
equivalent, ~10 m/sec, gravitational acceleration at the surface.
(Presumably, the surface gravity would be generated by a ball of
neutronium or some other very dense substance at the center of the
planetoid.)  Sad to say, the atmosphere would not last long at
all---the planetoid is so small, its gravitational field is too
shallow to create much of an escape velocity.

`Container', in this case, gravity, is very relevant, as soon as you
start to think of a whole atmosphere.

More practically, American taxpayers have spent far far more on
figuring out the container for water on Mars than has ever been spent
on the Lojban project: currently, Mars has very little water in its
atmosphere.  There is evidence for water in the past.  Where has it
gone?  One theory was that the water molecules in the atmosphere were
broken into hydrogen and oxygen by ultraviolet light, and the hydrogen
escaped.  (Another, more likely theory, is that Martian water is
frozen at the poles.)

Again, this is an example that when you stop thinking of air as
infinite, and think of it as a "reserve, store, or supply", then you
*do* need to consider, indeed, you cannot avoid considering, the
container.  Of course, in many, perhaps most conversations, the
container place for {sorcu} may be obvious or unimportant, and
therefore be elided.

Nonetheless, the underlying notion behind a reserve, store, or supply
is of something that is separated from the rest of the universe; the
boundary is the container.

   No doubt. I agree that when in English the word "store" is used, the
   container is usually relevant, while if you use "supply", you are not
   in general refering to a container. Some supplies are _stored_ in
   containers.

Supplies are just like stores: entities of some sort, treated as
different from other parts of the universe.  The idea behind the
definition of {sorcu} is to get at the underlying idea behind the
words in English that are variously glossed as reserve, store, or
supplyp plus the other words that go with them.  In all cases this is
a notion of some thing (where `thing' might mean `data') that is
separated from other things.

   >     "They are collecting the supplies needed for the trip."

   The collected supplies are not all in one place, they are distributed
   in the homes of all the members of the expedition. The reserve of wood
   is also not in one place. Part of it is still in the form of trees.

Yes, indeed.  In which case, if you fill in the place, you should
mention these places.  Indeed, when I make up lists for a trip, I
sometimes do note where the supplies are stored, lest I forget.  Two
weeks ago, for example, I forgot where I stored my sun glasses.
(Turned out I had put the glasses in a zippered pocket of my pack
rather than with my maps as usual.)

   > My mother prepared for a picnic not long ago.  She asked me to help
   > her put on the pack carrying lunch.

   The night before the trip, when the supplies were distributed in various
   places in the kitchen, were they not supplies?

Nope, they are not supplies until I start defining them as supplies.
If I did define them as supplies the night before, then the containers
they were in might or might not be elided in conversation.  Probably,
I would elide the containers, not even bothering to use {zo'e}.

   > One of the supplies she had
   > collected for this little trip was a container of orange juice.

   Ok. Her "supply-of-orange-juice" was inside a "container". Two different
   concepts.

Nope.  The supply-of-orange-juice that was in my mind when I wrote
that sentence included the concept of the container.  Unfortunately,
it is clear that my mother elided thought of the container when she
packed.

   How would you say in Lojban "take the reserve of gold from the safe
   to the bank"?

ko muvdu lo sorcu be lo solji bei le snuryvasru be'o lo banxa

Imperative: move that which is really a reserve or supply of gold
located in the secure-vessel to that which is really a bank.

    Does the reserve change when moved to another container?

Yes, it certainly does!  If I had a supply of gold, I would think
about it very differently if it were located in a relatively insecure
container compared to a secure vault.  I would worry less in the
latter instance.  The "store/dep