Re: ka/ni kama

[JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

>>  I can't find
>> any gismu that has a place for a dimensioned quantity.
>
>Several have places marked [quanitity] that seem like they would
>only work with dimensioned ones--in fact {le klani} itself is either
>t (with {se klani] being a number) or else (as seems more natural)
>it is a particular instance of a quantity, in which case {se klani}
>must be a dimensioned quantity.  Are not "the 5 kilos of rice I
>have in mind" and "the 10 meters of rope I have in mind" both {klani}?

This is what the gi'uste says:

klani [ lai ] quantity

x1 is a quantity quantified/measured/enumerated
            by x2 (quantifier) on scale x3 (si'o)

(It seems that it was changed! My printed gi'uste gives "x1 (quantifier)
is a quantity/amount of x2 on scale x3". Now x1 and x2 are reversed!
 So all my comments about ni should be understood with {sela'u} rather
than {la'u}.)

This is how I would use klani:

            lei plise cu klani li ci le ka kancu
            The apples amount to 3 as counted.

            le rismi cu klani li mu le ka ki'ogra
            The rice amounts to 5 in kilograms.

            le cilta cu klani li pano le ka mitre
            The rope amounts to 10 in meters.

So, yes, the 5 kilograms of rice and the 10 meter rope are
both klani, but the dimensioned numbers 5kg and 10m
are not! They're not se klani either. The se klani are pure
numbers.

I have no idea why scale places are marked as (si'o).
Are there any examples of how to use that?

>What about {te merli}?

Same thing

        mi merli le rismi li mu le ka ki'ogra
        I measure the rice as 5 in kilograms.

The point is that the number and the scale are always
in different terbri, so there is no use for dimensioned
numbers.

>> And then you must disagree with things like:
>>         le ni la djan cu ricfu cu du li piso'i
>>         The extent to which John is rich is a lot.
>
>I wouldn't use {du} as they are not the same identity, but {dunli}
>seems OK.

I don't understand, in what sense can a pure number and a
dimensioned one be equal? Is 5kg equal to 5 or to 5000?

>If {li piso'i} or {li rau} cannot be dimensioned, then
>they are not very useful as quantifiers.

Why not? Since no terbri asks for a dimensioned number,
where would you use them? As pure numbers they work
well:

        ta mitre li rau
        That is long enough.

>Perhaps it is "raising" in
>a sense to treat numbers as both "pure" and as quantities with
>elided dimensions, but I don't see how a useful language can do it
>any other way, especially since lojban makes no other effort to
>clarify dimensioned quantities.

The scale is usually in a separate terbri. (BTW, that would not
be sumti raising in the sense normally used by Lojbanists.
That's when you use a sumti in a place where you should
use a predication about the sumti.)

 >> First, what do you need to express "3 meters" as a sumti for?
>
>It is a concept I can hold in my mind; if I cannot express it, then
>why am I wasting my time with this language?

I can't answer that for you. :)

> How do you answer {ma junta}?

That's a good question! I wonder why there is such a word
for weight but not for things like length, size, age, etc.

I don't know how I would answer, because I indeed would
need a dimensioned number there, and Lojban doesn't
have them! The place structure I would expect is something
like "x1 weighs x2 on scale x3".

ua, I know how I would answer:

- i ma junta ti
- i ti bunda li re

 (I thought of making a lujvo for newtons but I gave up, any ideas?)

>The abstract properties like "weight" and "luminosity" and "length"
>must be expressible without reference to specific heavy, bright, or long
>things, because the mind can think of them that way.

The mind sure can be kidded into thinking of them. But you haven't
convinced me yet that there's something you can't say in Lojban
because of the lack of dimensioned numbers.

co'o mi'e xorxes