BPFK Section: lerfu Forming cmavo as of 17 March 2004: Difference between revisions

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
 
m (Gleki moved page bPFK Section: lerfu Forming cmavo as of 17 March 2004 to BPFK Section: lerfu Forming cmavo as of 17 March 2004 over a redirect without leaving a redirect: Text replace - "bPFK" to "BPFK")
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:


The relevant part of the CLL for lerfu-forming cmavo is chapter 17, specifically, sections 3, 5, 6, 7 and 14. I find no internal contradictions in the text, and its completeness is satisfactory, except for a small concern about alphabet and font shifts, which I will return to shortly.


== An essay on gadri ==
The words in this paradigm has seen almost no use outside the language definition materials. This probably is because they are related to spelling, which is a predominantly oral activity. (Finding occurrences of "aitch" in an English corpus this small would probably give similar results.) It is perhaps worth mentioning that I discovered the members of LAU, TEI and FOI on a Wiki page titled "Cmavo that are a ghastly waste of precious monosyllabic cmavo space"...


On this page I have essayed an exposition of gadri to someone who is neither a novice nor completely sure of the differences among the gadri. Hopefully someone with superior pedagogical skills can retranslate this page for those who still find it indigestible.
However, I'm happy to report that "boi" is being used, and always correctly. Some examples:


'''As usual, please don't annotate the main text other than by the insertion of footnote references; add any comments at the end.'''
[http://www.lojban.org/texts/translations/alice/alice_7.html]


'''o-gadri and e-gadri'''. O-gadri (''lo, loi, lo'e'') and e-gadri (''le, lei, le'e'') can be defined in terms of ''lo'i'' and ''le'i'' respectively. ''lo'i broda'' refers to the set of all broda. ''le'i broda'' refers to a set that may be defined either extensionally, by its membership, or intensionally, by the entry criteria for membership. The truth of a statement that includes an e-gadri cannot be determined until the identity of the corresponding le'i has been established (either through context or through a sentence-internal identification). (Members of le'i broda needn't be broda: hence e-gadri are ''nonveridical''. However, ''le'i du ku noi ke'a broda'' means the same as ''le'i broda'' except that this time the members are broda.) Similarly, 'a-gadri' (''la, lai'') can be defined in terms of ''la'i''.
[http://www.lojban.org/texts/translations/alice/alice_9.html]


'''Definitions in terms of ''lV'i'''''
The Book does not say explicitly how far the alphabet shift (zai and friends) and the font shift lasts. Presumably, it must last for more than one letter, because of the existence of the font-and-alphabet shift cancelling cmavo "na'a" (p 418), and the illustration on p 412 ("zai xanlerfu bu ly .obu jy by .abu ny.").


|lo'e broda|= lo'e ro lu'a lo'i broda|_|le'e broda|= lo'e ro lu'a le'i broda|_|_|
Since there is a possibillity of specifying categories such as font face and text size separately (according to examples 5.5 - 5.7), I have assumed that the intention is for the ce'a shift to take effect until another ce'a shift is applied to the ''same category''. My cmavo definition of ce'a reflects that. I will leave it to the shepherd of BY to take care of the other cmavo that act similarly.


|(su'o) lo broda|= su'o lu'a lo'i broda|_|su'o le broda|= su'o lu'a le'i broda|_|su'o la broda|= su'o lu'a la'i broda
== Proposed dictionary entries ==


|ro lo broda|= ro lu'a lo'i broda|_|(ro) le broda|= ro lu'a le'i broda|_|(ro) la broda|= ro lu'a la'i broda
;boi: Terminates a letteral sequence or a numeral.


|loi broda|= lu'o lo'i broda|_|lei broda|= lu'o le'i broda|_|lai broda|= lu'o la'i broda
;bu: Combines with the previous word to make a Lojban letteral, provided that it is not one of the quote cmavo (ZO, ZOI, LOhU, LEhU) or one of the erasure cmavo (SI, SA, SU), ZEI, BAhE, or FAhO. If the aforementioned previous word is already a letteral, the resulting letteral will not necessarily be the same, for instance, "ky. bu" != "ky". In addition to single words, bu can be combined with a letteral that is already a composite of a word+bu.


'''Featural analysis'''
;ce'a: Converts the following lerfu to a font change letteral; font changes affect every letteral after them in the letteral sequence.  More than one can be in effect at a time, but if two directly contradict each other, only the latest one applies.


|_|-specific|+specific|cmene
;foi: Marks the end of a combination letteral; the resulting letteral is some unspecified (lexically defined) combination of all the enclosed letterals.


|set|''lo'i''|''le'i''|''la'i''
;lau: Converts the following letteral to punctuation. The following letteral may be a single letteral word, a combination letteral with tei and foi, or a letteral combined with bu. It may also be prefixed by lau.


|distributive|''lo''|''le''|''la''
;tau: Converts the following letteral to the opposite case, e.g. convert an uppercase letteral to lowercase, or a lowercase letteral to uppercase. The following letteral may be a single letteral word, a combination letteral with tei and foi, or a letteral combined with bu. It may also be prefixed by lau.


|collective|''loi''|''lei''|''lai''
;tei: Marks the beginning of a combination letteral; the resulting letteral is some unspecified (lexically defined) combination of all the enclosed letterals.


|generic (singularized)|''lo'e''|''le'e''|
;zai: Marks the following letteral as an alphabet shift. The following letteral may be a single letteral word, a combination letteral with tei and foi, or a letteral combined with bu. It may also be prefixed by lau.


The difference between -specific and +specific is the difference between o-gadri and e-gadri.
== Proposed keywords ==


'Distributive': for ''lV broda cu brode'', each member of lV'i broda is separately a brode.
;boi: end letteral. end numeral


'Collective': for ''lVi broda cu brode'', the membership of lV'i broda is jointly/collectively a brode.
;bu: sign. character. symbol.  


'Generic/Singularized': for ''lV'e broda cu brode'', it is presupposed that lV'i broda has exactly one member, and that member is claimed to be a brode. In a version of the local world that is relevantly similar to the local world but contains exactly one lu'a lV'i broda (and may in fact be the local world), the one lu'a lV'i broda is a brode.
;ce'a: change font to. in font.  


'''Redundancies and defaults'''
;foi: characters joined together


When lV'i has no members, only lV'e is sensical (or nonvacuous).
;lau: punctuation symbol. punctuation sign.  


When lV'i has a single member, the distributive--collective distinction is redundant. Each gadri within the same o/e/a-series can be replaced other (non-set) gadri in the series, without affecting truth-conditions. However, the choice of gadri is not entirely arbitrary. lV'e avoids invoking the redundant distributive--collective distinction and thereby avoids implying that the distinction is relevant and that lV'i therefore has more than one member. And if the choice is between lV and lVi, lVi is preferable because, unlike lV, it does not involve quantification (and the complexities of scope that that can entail).
;tau: uppercase.  


When lo'i has a single member, the distinction between o-gadri and e-gadri used veridically is redundant, since there is no possible contrast between lo'i and a subset of lo'i. Here, the o-gadri is preferable, both so as to avoid the potential nonveridicality of e-gadri and so as to avoid implying that the o-gadri/e-gadri distinction is relevant and that therefore lo'i has more than one member.
;tei: character composed of


NB This discussion considers only semantic criteria in choosing default gadri. One may also consider phonological criteria (i.e. shortness). There are ideological differences concerning the desirability of considering phonological criteria.
;zai: change alphabet to. in alphabet.


'''Paradigm gaps and experimental gadri'''
== Omission of unused cmavo ==


'''''pa'ei'''''. When lV'i has a single member, but we don't know whether lo'i has a single member, which gadri is it best to use? We don't want to use ''lo'e'', because that would mean that ''lo'i'' has a single member. We could choose ''le'e'', but ''le'e'' could be seen as implying that the o-gadri--e-gadri distinction is relevant and that therefore lo'i has more than one member or the description is nonveridical. As an option for this circumstance, ''pa'ei'' is proposed: it is veridical, refers to a single individual, but does not say that this individual is the only member of lo'i.
Given that Lojban does not seem to be intended for holding multilingual spelling bees, and that a dictionary containing many unused cmavo with bizarre functions could confuse learners of the language, the BPFK does not recommend to include the alphabet shift ''zai'' in learning materials intended even for advanced learners. The cmavo should not be reassigned to have other meanings, however.


'''''la'ei'''''. There is a gap in the gadri paradigm for a lV'e-series a-gadri -- a generic/singularized cmene. ''la'ei'' fills this gap.
== Overall changes ==


'''''lau'i''-series'''. If le'i broda is seen as a +specific subset of lo'i broda, then there is a gap in the paradigm for gadri based on a nonspecific subset of lo'i broda (i.e. ''da poi ke'a klesi lo'i broda''). To fill this gap, ''lau'i'' and a series of gadri based on it are proposed.
This proposal entails the following changes:


|lau'e broda|= lo'e ro lu'a lau'i broda
* Codify that letteral shifts last indefinitely or until superseded by another shift in the same category.
* Replace old definitions with new ones (see above)


|su'o lau'a broda|= su'o lu'a lau'i broda
* Add new keywords (see above)


|(ro) lau'a broda|= ro lu'a lau'i broda
== Impact ==


|lau'o broda|= lu'o lau'i broda
It is my opinion that these changes are mere clarifications, and will not impact or invalidate usage, current or past. It also appears to agree with the letter shifts in [[BPFK Section: Lerfu Shifts]].
 
If ''lau'i'' were extensionally defined and had only a single member then it would simpler to use ''lo'' rather than an au-gadri. Therefore the use of an au-gadri implies that lau'i either is intensionally defined or has more than one member.
 
'''Full gadri paradigm'''
 
|set|''lo'i''|''lau'i''|''le'i''|''la'i''|
 
|distributive|''lo''|''lau'a''|''le''|''la''|
 
|collective|''loi''|''lau'o''|''lei''|''lai''|
 
|generic (singularized)|''lo'e''|''lau'e''|''le'e''|''la'ei''|''pa'ei''
 
'''Stats'''
 
For a message to Jboske from a while back, I compiled some statistics of my gadri usage in a text that uses only the official gadri but uses them according to the principles and preferences described above.
 
|total lo'e|208|
 
|    lo'e before du'u/ka|_|102
 
|    lo'e elsewhere|_|106
 
|lo|48|
 
|loi|6|
 
|le'e|61|
 
|le|2 (both {su'o le}|
 
|lei|9|
 
|lo'i|3|
 
|le'i|0|
 
I seem not to have collected stats on ''la/lai/la'i'', but there are lots of ''lai'' and no ''la'' or ''la'i''.
 
--[[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]].
 
----
 
I (nitcion) like the start and not the end. In particular
 
* lo'e to me is still marked, and moreover is marked for squinting: extrapolating properties from a population that do not necessarily apply to each given individual, and conversely, missing out on properties that may apply to every individual. In that sense, it looks highly misleading to me as the preferred article applied to a singular population, as you propose it; and the misleadingness is more salient than what you claim for lo and loi.
** I think your view is reasonable, but I would hope that we come to think of lo'e as primarily generic, and squinting as the mechanism you need in order to get from a nonsingleton to a singleton.
 
**But generic still implies to me something to generalise amongst, which is highly marked when the population is already a singleton. That's why I said lo'e for singular populations is odd to me.
* pa'ei, I take it, is reasonably close to ''the''. But I'll need more information before I am anywhere near liking it.
 
** Yes, I think it is pretty close to singular ''the''.
**If were going to have an exp.cmavo for 'the' (and we may or may not need it --- most ppl, I suspect, are still treating ''le'' as definite), I'd much  rather it be the iota quantifier, which is much more useful. (To anyone listening: this is how Bertrand Russell resolved "how do you say 'the' in logic" --- by  making up a quantifier, alongside "for all" and "exists", picking out the one entity you want to talk about.
 
* I don't think people have been clamoring for la'ei, and I suspect naming already involves a notion akin to singularisation --- singling out; so I don't think names even want a singulative.
** The ''la:lai'' distinction implies that names aren't inherently singular. I would be happy to dispense with ''la'' and ''la'i'' and just have ''lai'', deriving the others by means of LAhE. People have absolutely been clamouring for ''la'ei''. As things stand, this is because only a small handful of Lojbanists appear to have much understanding of gadri and to have applied that understanding to their usage. But even if that changed, the demand for ''la'ei'' would be minimla. But popular demand is only one rationale for experimental cmavo; gap-filling is another.
 
* lau'i is what, a certain kind of X and I don't know which? You'll have to demonstrate why we need to be able to say such a thing; you haven't yet.
** ''lau'i'' is either some nonspecific kind of X, or else some nonspecific set of X. In English, they correspond to nonspecific indefinite plurals.
 
** *shrug* as do Lojban masses already (''loi''), without positing phantom classes. You'll need to explain more.
* And, the older I get, the more I luuurve structuralism; but not every gap in a system cries out to be filled. The rest goes into the latest local rant against exp cmavo; I will add to it here, though, that exp cmavo does occur in a social context, and thereby are an easy currency to debase.

Latest revision as of 12:16, 2 July 2014

The relevant part of the CLL for lerfu-forming cmavo is chapter 17, specifically, sections 3, 5, 6, 7 and 14. I find no internal contradictions in the text, and its completeness is satisfactory, except for a small concern about alphabet and font shifts, which I will return to shortly.

The words in this paradigm has seen almost no use outside the language definition materials. This probably is because they are related to spelling, which is a predominantly oral activity. (Finding occurrences of "aitch" in an English corpus this small would probably give similar results.) It is perhaps worth mentioning that I discovered the members of LAU, TEI and FOI on a Wiki page titled "Cmavo that are a ghastly waste of precious monosyllabic cmavo space"...

However, I'm happy to report that "boi" is being used, and always correctly. Some examples:

[1]

[2]

The Book does not say explicitly how far the alphabet shift (zai and friends) and the font shift lasts. Presumably, it must last for more than one letter, because of the existence of the font-and-alphabet shift cancelling cmavo "na'a" (p 418), and the illustration on p 412 ("zai xanlerfu bu ly .obu jy by .abu ny.").

Since there is a possibillity of specifying categories such as font face and text size separately (according to examples 5.5 - 5.7), I have assumed that the intention is for the ce'a shift to take effect until another ce'a shift is applied to the same category. My cmavo definition of ce'a reflects that. I will leave it to the shepherd of BY to take care of the other cmavo that act similarly.

Proposed dictionary entries

boi
Terminates a letteral sequence or a numeral.
bu
Combines with the previous word to make a Lojban letteral, provided that it is not one of the quote cmavo (ZO, ZOI, LOhU, LEhU) or one of the erasure cmavo (SI, SA, SU), ZEI, BAhE, or FAhO. If the aforementioned previous word is already a letteral, the resulting letteral will not necessarily be the same, for instance, "ky. bu" != "ky". In addition to single words, bu can be combined with a letteral that is already a composite of a word+bu.
ce'a
Converts the following lerfu to a font change letteral; font changes affect every letteral after them in the letteral sequence. More than one can be in effect at a time, but if two directly contradict each other, only the latest one applies.
foi
Marks the end of a combination letteral; the resulting letteral is some unspecified (lexically defined) combination of all the enclosed letterals.
lau
Converts the following letteral to punctuation. The following letteral may be a single letteral word, a combination letteral with tei and foi, or a letteral combined with bu. It may also be prefixed by lau.
tau
Converts the following letteral to the opposite case, e.g. convert an uppercase letteral to lowercase, or a lowercase letteral to uppercase. The following letteral may be a single letteral word, a combination letteral with tei and foi, or a letteral combined with bu. It may also be prefixed by lau.
tei
Marks the beginning of a combination letteral; the resulting letteral is some unspecified (lexically defined) combination of all the enclosed letterals.
zai
Marks the following letteral as an alphabet shift. The following letteral may be a single letteral word, a combination letteral with tei and foi, or a letteral combined with bu. It may also be prefixed by lau.

Proposed keywords

boi
end letteral. end numeral
bu
sign. character. symbol.
ce'a
change font to. in font.
foi
characters joined together
lau
punctuation symbol. punctuation sign.
tau
uppercase.
tei
character composed of
zai
change alphabet to. in alphabet.

Omission of unused cmavo

Given that Lojban does not seem to be intended for holding multilingual spelling bees, and that a dictionary containing many unused cmavo with bizarre functions could confuse learners of the language, the BPFK does not recommend to include the alphabet shift zai in learning materials intended even for advanced learners. The cmavo should not be reassigned to have other meanings, however.

Overall changes

This proposal entails the following changes:

  • Codify that letteral shifts last indefinitely or until superseded by another shift in the same category.
  • Replace old definitions with new ones (see above)
  • Add new keywords (see above)

Impact

It is my opinion that these changes are mere clarifications, and will not impact or invalidate usage, current or past. It also appears to agree with the letter shifts in BPFK Section: Lerfu Shifts.

Retrieved from "https://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=BPFK_Section:_lerfu_Forming_cmavo_as_of_17_March_2004&oldid=103079"