response to your technical questions from last month

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

Glyn:

I don't think I ever responded to technical questions in your posting
from last month:

>Date:         Mon, 18 Oct 1993 17:22:17 -0400
>From: Glyn Gowing <querist@BIX.COM>
>
>Let's see if this makes it to the list...

I don't think it did but I will post the questions and my responses
to the list.

>I've just started with the proposed texbook lessons, and have already
>hit some philosophical questions concerning the usage and meanings of
>certain brivla:
>
>(these are all from lesson 1, exercise 1-2, p13 in my copy of the book)
>
>cpana  3: x1 is on/upon [the top surface of] x2 in reference
>          frame/gravity x3
>
>that's no problem, but:
>
>sanli  3: x1 stands [is vertically oriented] on surface x2 supported
>          by pedistle/limbs x3.
>
>does leave me with a question.  I would think that it would be
>appropriate to add a 4th cmavo (is that the right word? i'm new at this)
>to sanli to indicate reference frame/gravity.  A proposed redefinition
>would be:
>
>*sanli  x1 stands [is vertically oriented] on surface x2 supported by
>        pedistal/limbs x3 in reference to gravity/reference frame x4.
>
>I will assume that there is some reason why this was not done, and i am
>missing something fairly obvious.  What am i missing?

Nothing obvious, but I think I see/saw "vertically oriented" as meaning
perpendicular (approximately) to the surface being stood upon.  The
approximately of course refers to the fact that you are not
perpendicular when leaning or walking on a slope - wherupon a gravity
field WOULD be relevant.  However, in space where there is no gravity,
"standing" is almost certainly defined relative to the surface, so this
should take precedence over gravity field.

>prenu leaves me with a question:  how do you define a personality?
>animals often demonstrate distinctive 'personalities'.  My siamese is
>very loving and affectionat to me only, and aloof to everyone else,
>including my wife.  On the other hand, one of my other cats (of unknown
>breed) is friendly towards just about anyone.

I know some people like that, too.

You basically make the case that "personality" is in the eye of the
beholder.  And perhaps it is.  But in most cases, when you use the word,
a relative-to place would not be significant to the truth claim.  Thus,
I would say that if you think it is important, add an observer or a
standard place using a BAI tag.


>Finally, colours:
>
>blanu   x1 is blue
>xunre   x1 is red
>
>what exactly do you mean by red? what exactly do you mean by blue?
>Different languages/peoples demarcate the boundries between colours
>differently.  An example:  in English, one would speak of a goose being
>grey.  In Welsh, the same goose would be described with the word glas,
>which is usually translated into english as blue.  Welsh has a word
>which is translated as grey (llwyd), but that is not the proper word to
>use in that situation.

And because there are variable standards, we chose NOT to make formal
definitions, or even to include the variety of conditional places that
might be applied to the gismu.  You need to add whichever you think are
relevant using BAI tags (observer, standards, under conditions, etc.)

Regardless of the variance in definitions, I believe it is true that the
center or ideal points of the various colors are relatively consistent
across languages.  Some languages have cultural exclusions irrespective
of the formal existence of a color word especially for 'minor colors',
as I would suspect is true for your Welsh example (or maybe a grey goose
is not that close to ideal grey - can't bring a picture to mind at the
moment).  Very few English speakers will use the term (or the gismu)
'cyan' to label the color on their CRT screen, even if it IS that color.
And those who DO know the color as 'cyan' would probably never use that
word in a non-video environment for the same color.

Thus all colors need some or all of the BAI tagged places to be
accurate.  In this case, the nature of color is so culturally marked,
that we chose to leave all of the qualifiers off.  Ideally this will
mean that at some point Lojban will develop its own color breakdown
independent of any other language.   In the meantime, if you want to
refer to 'chinese brown' and distinguish it from the 'American' variety,
you can make the tanru 'jungo bunre', or the corresponding lujvo.

Note that 'skari', which defines what a color is, does have the places
for a formal specification of the range.

lojbab