mathematical proof
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Section 2.1
- lu .ue sai y xu sfasa su'o da lo nu punji ra ti li'u ju'e
- Should be "nu sfasa", I think.
- {ni'o py nergau lo tolcitno je mudri vorme .i sy viska lo jinme nerklaji poi li'a citno}
- jinme nerklaji? klaji laj street 'avenue' x1 is a street/avenue/lane/drive/cul-de-sac/way/alley/road at x2 accessing x3
- {.i lo nenri vorme cu jinme gi'e za'a tsali}
- Maybe, {vrogai} or {vrobi'u}?
- {.i .u'u mi lo ka xanka cu dukse lo nu citka djica}
- If this means "Sorry, but my nervousness is more than my hunger", {dukse} doesn't work here. Don't know what does.
- {gi'e kajde lo nu catra da poi na jundi ri}
- fi lo nu
- {.e'u ma'a xruti le sanmi kumfa}
- fi le
- {gi'e kajde lo nu catra da poi na jundi ri}
- fi lo nu
- {.e'u ma'a xruti le sanmi kumfa}
- fi le
- {.i ji'a ry sanli gi'e skaci ke midju polgau se pi'o lo xanri skaci gi'e ckire cuksu fi dy}
- s/cuksu/cusku/ What does the first part mean, anyway? ry imitates a Middle Polynesian using an imaginary skirt?
- {.i ku'i mi kanpe lo nu do na se spaji}
- kanpe ki'a
Section 2.2
- ni'o loi ci prenu cu casnu lo na vajni ca'o lo nu xruti le sanmi kumfa
- {xruti fi le sanmi kumfa}
- {.i sy zgana lo nu le flira be py cu na'e gleki binxo gi'e rivbi dy} "rivbi riv avoid 'evade' x1 avoids/evades/shuns/escapes/skirts fate x2 (event)"
- So {tu'a dy}?
- s/sabju/sabji/
- {.i sy cuksu lu mi ka'e}
- s/cuksu/cusku/
- {.i ji'a ry sanli gi'e skaci ke midju polgau se pi'o lo xanri skaci gi'e ckire cuslu fi dy}
- s/cuslu/cusku/ ?
> > {ei} shows how the speaker feels things ought to be, not an
> > oblgation by the speaker.
>
> Erm, how do you figure that?
Usage, usefulness, consistency, and even CLL supports that
interpretation.
Usage: that's how I've always used it and that's how I've seen
it used too:
<Taliesin> do .ei ciska bau la lojban
<xod> .ei su'odo rivbi le nu penmi .oi
<xod> .ei la tsali cu fanva
<zef> ei zo te basti zo to di'u
Usefulness: The feeling of obligation on the part of the
speaker corresponds to the feeling of how things ought to be
when the speaker is the agent, so it is a more restricted
sense. There is not much point in restricting {ei} to sentences
where {mi} is the agent.
Consistency: the whole e-series of attitudinals is used for
attitudes of the speaker towards a hypothetical situation.
CLL has two examples with {.ei}. The first one is funny:
3.10) .ei mi tisna
le karce ctilyvau
[[jbocre: obligation|obligation]] I fill
the car-type-of petroleum-container.
I should fill the car's gas tank.
It is not decisive because {mi} is the agent, although the
English translation is wrong. It really should be "I should
become stuffed with the car's gas tank". (To be fair, I think
the place structure of {tisna} was changed at some point.)
But the other example:
11.5) pe'i la kartagos. .ei se daspo
[[jbocre: I opine!|I opine!]] Carthage [[jbocre: obligation|obligation]] is-destroyed.
In my opinion, Carthage should be destroyed.
clearly shows that {.ei} is about how the speaker feels things
ought to be.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
Section 2.3
- to'u nai jai se srera fai pa valsi po lo ro moi jufra po lo pa moi jufmei po lo 2 pi 3 pi'e 2 moi se fendi i mi stidi lo nu zo marxa cu basti zo maxra
- {pa cnebo jinsi jadni sy .i le jinsi}
- jinsi ki'a
- s/cuksu/cusku/
- s/maxra/marxa/
> > > fe lu .oi do pu kakne lo nu jdegau mi tu'a le janco
> >
> > s/jdegau/kajde
>
> Nope. kajde is non-agentive.
{jdegau fi mi fo tu'a le janco} then?
> > > .i zo'o nai mi ca ponse pa barda ke skapi ciblu
> >
> > I think this is pilka more than skapi.
> > skapi is the material, it is the pilka once
> > it has been removed from the animal.
>
> I disagree. skapi need not have been removed, and pilka includes
> fruit rinds and so on. I'm going to ask the archivists about this.
I certainly don't dispute {pilka} includes fruit rinds and tree bark.
There are many body-parts that work both for animals and plants.
{pilka} is clearly a part-whole relationship.
{skapi}, on the other hand, is a product-source relationship, like
{silka} and {sunla}. I think gismu place structures should be much
more regular than what they are, but in some cases there are very
clear classes of place structures, like specimen-species, part-whole,
substance-composition, substance-source. {pilka} is clearly
part-whole and {skapi} is clearly substance-source.
(I'm not exactly sure what to make of Lojbab's response on this.)
Section 2.4
> > > .i ji'a xy rinka so'u da poi xlali
> >
> > I read this as "also, it causes a few bad things", and was
> > expecting to be told what they were. I think what D might
> > have meant is that it doesn't cause any important bad thing?
>
> s/so'u/pi so'u roi/
A fraction of an occasion?
> > > lo ni sy certu cu banzu lo nu na birti fa lo nu lo kalte cu
> > > mrobi'i
> >
> > s/mrobi'i/mrobi'o
> >
> > I don't understand the sentence though. Susan's skill was
> > enough to not be certain of a hunter's death?
>
> Yes. "She's good enough that it's not a certainly that she'll get
> one of us killed".
>
> s/birti/ju'o gasnu/; see if that helps.
Hmm, ok. The {fa} is wrong though.
> > > .i ku'i ca zi bo ky nergau le citka kumfa to ri vasru vy jo'u sy
> > > toi
> >
> > I think we already knew that V and S were in the room.
>
> No, we had no idea what room they were in.
...
> The goal was: "K entered the dining room, where d & s were".
I see. I would have said {noi vy jo'u sy zvati ke'a}, but I guess
your phrase is not wrong.
> > You seem to use {diklo} a lot, I don't really know what it means.
>
> x1 is near to x2 within possible range x3
Similar to {jibni} then? But the gi'uste uses "locus". If you look
at all the definitions that use that word you get a different idea.
> > > .i re makcu remna cu tcetce terpa lo nu lo fagri [[jbocre: ...|...]] cu jibni
> > > vo'a? gi'e jbini le makcu bi'i le verba
>
> What does vo'a bind to there? Do we even know?
{re makcu prena} supposedly.
> > Otherwise we get the fire between between the adults and the
> > child.
>
> Erm, *yes*. That's the point. The child is causing fire to project
> from emself towards the parents.
"between between"?
My point is that {jbini ko'a bi'i ko'e}, with the duplicated "between",
is strange. It's {jbini ko'a jo'u ko'e} or {zvati ko'a bi'i ko'e}.
> > > ni'o .a'o cai sy ca'o na bajra gi'e ku'i jgari pa makcu gi'e
> > > lacpu ri fa'a lo vomre
> >
> > s/vomre/vorme
> >
> > "Hopefully, S is not running but grabbing one adult and pulling
> > them towards the door"??
>
> "with great hope" was the goal. i.e. she's scared out of her mind
> but trying anyways.
That's not my understanding of how {a'o} works.
> > > ni'o sy za'u re'u zgana lo nu lo blupinxe cu ka'e sezymuvgau? se
> > > kai lo mutce mutce sutra
> >
> > s/sezymuvgau/muvdu
>
> Erm, no. muvdu is not agentive.
It's not non-agentive either. It's neutral in that respect.
I can understand using {sezmuvgau} when it is for some reason
important to emphasize the agentiveness, but not every time.
Why don't you say {sezklagau} for explicitly agentive {klama},
or {sezvi'egau} for explicitly agentive {vitke}, or {sezypipygau}
for explicitly agentive {plipe}, etc.
Anyway, that's just a minor point of style. (You don't need the
y-hyphen BTW.)
On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 07:32:46AM -0800, Jorge Llamb?as wrote:
>
> > > > .i se ki'u bo ko fargau? le cribe gi'e klama le rirni gi'e
> > > > xenru cusku
> > >
> > > s/fargau/cliva ?
> >
> > I just didn't know if I needed a y in fargau.
>
> Oh, you probably meant {dargau} then. {fargau} is from {farna
> gasnu}.
Oh, no, I meant *bargau*.
> You only need a y-hyphen after {r} in {ryr}, every other consonant
> is ok after {r}.
Cool.
> > I want him to be chanting truth tables; suggestions *very*
> > welcome.
>
> You mean you want to express logical notation in plain language?
More or less, yes.
> The problem is that in Lojban plain language and logical notation
> are one and the same (or very close).
True, but you still need to be able to say "the cmava .e behaves in
[[jbocre: this|this]] fashion" in Lojban, or we have an incomplete language.
> {bu'a i ja bu'e} entails, well, {ga bu'a gi bu'e}. You could say
> {lo du'u ga bu'a gi bu'e cu nibli lo du'u ga lo du'u bu'a cu jetnu
> gi lo du'u bu'e cu jetnu}, but that's like saying {lo du'u bu'a cu
> nibli lo du'u lo du'u bu'a cu jetnu}, it's not really related to
> truth tables.
As long as it's hyper-logical, it fits the story, but that's not
really what I was looking for, no. I suppose a Lojban definition of
.a that never uses a logical connective would be about right.
> > > > .i ji'a le barda ke vlagi ctebi cu tunlo gi'e xunre
> > > ...
> > > > .i le pinji cu pu tunlo je ke mutce jdari ke'e binxo
> > >
> > > tunlo ma?
> >
> > punli again. "swollen"
>
> I think you forgot to change one of them. But {punli} sounds too
> permanent for this. Maybe {se preja}?
Good idea.
-Robin
> > > > > .i se ki'u bo ko fargau? le cribe gi'e klama le rirni gi'e
> > > > > xenru cusku
> > > >
> > > > s/fargau/cliva ?
> > >
> > > I just didn't know if I needed a y in fargau.
> >
> > Oh, you probably meant {dargau} then. {fargau} is from {farna
> > gasnu}.
>
> Oh, no, I meant *bargau*.
Make the bear be on the outside of what?
> > The problem is that in Lojban plain language and logical notation
> > are one and the same (or very close).
>
> True, but you still need to be able to say "the cmava .e behaves in
> [[jbocre: this|this]] fashion" in Lojban, or we have an incomplete language.
I wrote a definition for {.e} in jbovlaste using {kanxe}.
All logical connectives are in a logical sense bridi connectives. The
sumti connectives are just an abbreviated form {ko'a V ko'e broda}
= {gV ko'a broda gi ko'e broda}, but that is independent of the truth
tables.
> I suppose a Lojban definition of
> .a that never uses a logical connective would be about right.
It would have to be in terms of {vlina}. I wrote one
in jbovlaste, which can probably be improved.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
Section 2.5
> Yes, but *normally* things consist of more than their minds; this > one does not. > > How about: > > .i lo nu lo menli be la ctino po'u la ctino cu se daspo cu mintu > lonu ri se daspo s/po'u/no'u and I'll buy it. mu'o mi'e xorxes
- .i se ki'u bo sy pilno lo ckana poi vy facki va'u sy gi'e ba zi sipna
- s/va'u/se va'u/