[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
[moved to jboske]
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 08:26:46AM -0700, Jorge Llambías wrote:
> Jordan:
> > > > Check out x1 of lerfu. {la'e zo .abu} refers to a lerfu, but {naku
> > > > zo .abu lerfu}; zo .abu refers to the one and only lojban string
> > > > ".abu".
>
> (BTW, that definition of lerfu should be fixed at some point, it seems
> to suggest that {zo a bu} is grammatical. Or maybe it will end up being
> grammatical, we still have to figure out magic words.)
It should say "la'e [quoted text]" or something. You need to do
{la'e zoi ly. .abu .ly.} I guess.
I do think it would be useful to have a "quote next two words"
cmavo. {zo'ai}, perhaps.
I also don't understand why {bu} can't just be handled before {zo}.
I think jbofi'e actually does it...
> I wonder what you would understand of this dialog:
>
> A: ry blabi
> B: zo ry sinxa ma
> A: zo ry sinxa lo ractu i va'i la'e zo ry du lo ractu
>
> But that assumes that {zo ry enai la'e zo ry lerfu}.
Nope.
{la'e zo ry.} can be different things in different contexts.
Your dialog doesn't preclude that {la'e zo ry.} is sometimes the
letter R anymore than that sometimes {zo ry. sinxa lo remna}.
> I suppose you would rather say {la'e zo ry sinxa lo ractu ije
> la'e la'e zo ry du lo ractu}?
Here's my view:
sumti referent
-- --
ry. a rabbit (or whatever)
zo ry. The word "ry", as a quoted lojban string.
la'e zo ry. context (can be the rabbit, the letter R, or anything else)
The letter R is a distinct thing from the quoted string {ry.}.
roda zo'u naku ge du le lerfu pe zo ry. gi da du zo ry.
Now, as far as quantification is concerned, a string of lojban is
a string of lojban. {mi porpi} is always {mi porpi}. There's only
one such string.
It's the same as the mekso operator. {me'o re su'i re} is the mex
"2 + 2". There is not more than one string of "2 + 2" in number
theory.
It's also the same as predicate logic. A formula *is* the sequence
of symbols. It is always the same formula if it is the same sequence
of symbols (and therefore there is only one of each formula).
Does this make any sense?
--
Jordan DeLong
fracture@hidden.email
Attachment:
binXQot_7NpEB.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped