Re: Lojban ML: Syllogism and sophism

["Jorge J. Llambías" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

> >The scale necessarily provides the units.
>
>But your examples provided earlier in the message gave no indication of
>the scale in terms that would provide units.  Example:
>> >>    le nu ko'a sutra le nu broda cu cenba [le ka ce'u klani li xokau]
>>>>    Koha's speed at brodaing varies [in how much it is].
>
>How does one know even that this is speed rather than acceleration, much
>less whether it is kilometers/hour, meters/second**2 or furlongs/fortnight?

One doesn't know. The scale there is zo'e (x3 of klani) so unless we
are given more context, we can't tell. Your {le ni ko'a sutra le nu broda
cu cenba} is not more specifc about the scale, is it?

>le parbi be leni leni sutra cu cenba ku le temci

[You're missing {bei} there.]

Why {le temci} and not {le ni temci}?
Is {le ni cenba} different from {le te cenba}?
And you didn't explain what was {le se cenba} there.
Why not just:

    le parbi be le te cenba be le ka sutra be'o bei le temci
    The ratio of the change in fastness to time.

 >I need an expression that is at least as clear as an English language
>definition of speed or acceleration or whatever.

Before tackling acceleration we should know how to deal with
velocity, and before that with displacement. For displacement
we can use ve muvdu:

            le ve muvdu cu mitre li bi
            The path is 8 in meters.

Or also:

            le ve muvdu cu klani li bi le ka mitre
            The path is quantified as 8 in meters.

Or even:

            le muvdu cu klani li bi le ka le ve muvdu cu mitre
            The mover is quantified as 8 in the meters of its path.

In case it is not obvious, the scales are {le ka ce'uxipa mitre ce'uxire}
and {le ka le ve muvdu be fi ce'uxipa mitre ce'uxire}.

Then for velocity we might have:

            le muvdu cu klani li re le ka le ve muvdu cu mitre ze'a ro snidu
            The mover is quantified as 2 in the meters of its path for every
second.

If we had a lujvo for "x1 is x2 in meters per second", say {trenidyparbi},
then we could have:

            le muvdu cu trenidyparbi li re
            The mover is 2 in meters per second.

 >So if we wanted to talk about John's age, then either John or the event of
>John's living (lenu la djan. jmive) is a klani?

Exactly:

            la djan nanca li pamu
            John is 15 in years.

            la djan klani li pamu le ka nanca
            John is quantified as 15 in years.

            le nu la djan cu jmive cu nanca li pamu
            John's living is 15 in years.

            le nu la djan cu jmive cu klani li pamu le ka nanca
            John's living is quantified as 15 in years.

Any of those work for me. I prefer to use the first one which
is the simplest. If I understood correctly, you would say:

            le ni la djan cu jmive cu klani li pamu le si'o nanca
            The amount of John's living is 15 in a scale of years.

But I don't understand why {si'o} is any better than {ka}.
Is {si'o} really usable for dyadic relationships?

 >>>>(3)    le gugde cu klani li ciciki'oki'o le ka namcu pe lei xabju
>>>>         The country is 33,000,000 in number of inhabitants.
 >>
>>I didn't use {kancu} because last time I used it you objected that
>>it required someone doing the counting.
>
>??? le gugde cu klani li ciciki'oki'o leka le turni cu kancu le .y. .y.
>ni le prenu cu xabju vo'a

        le ka le turni cu kancu lei xabju be ce'uxipa ce'uxire

>or maybe le cmima be le'i xabju be co'a

I don't think you can replace {ce'u} with {vo'a}. We have to leave two
open slots to get a scale. And it has to be {lei cmima}. All the members
are counted, not each of them independently.


> A country is not a quantity.  You seem
>to be making mincemeat of the concepts of quantity and scale.

Not anymore than in the case of mitre, grake, etc. In English,
we say that the length of an object is x meters. In Lojban, we
simply relate the object with the number of meters. Same for all
quantities. The object (or event) is related with the number
that is a measurement of it in some scale.

> Not something
>I would have expected from someone trained in the physical sciences.

Why not? Why would you expect me to treat some quantities differently
than others?

I am not very happy though with the lujvo that I used above for "x1 is x2 in
meters per second", mainly because it's not easily generalized to
get  "x1 is x2 in meters per second squared" for example. Anyone
has any ideas how to make such lujvo?

co'o mi'e xorxes