xo'a lodji hoa: Difference between revisions

From Lojban
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
 
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:


Taking a preliminary stab, and using a formal (explicit) rather than informal expression:
Why ''lodji'' & not ''logji''?


* .i lo nanmu pazemei poi ke'a traji leka ce'u xadni clani  ''The 17some of men that are superlative in the property of body length''
''logji'': x1 is logic for reasoning about x2


This is a property the 17 hold in common as a unit; so anything said of them has to be said of a mass. A more colloquial version then might be:
''lodji'': x1 is logic for inferring x2 from x3


* .i lei paze nanmu poi traji leka xadni clani  ''The mass of 17 men who are superlative in body length''
I wish to utilize the x3 place; i could as well have said:


Problem is, of course, (a) when you're saying a mass is superlative, are you saying it relative to all other individuals, or other masses? (b) since the 17 are a well-defined set, you cannot allow an individual member of the mass to 'opt out' (the 17mei cannot include the 42moi), which actually sounds a lot more like a set. A '''set''' solution would be:
''logji fi'o jicmu le [http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?Three-value%20Logic imei]'' (or whatever)...'' le za'e jamro'' ?


* .i le'i paze nanmu poi ro lu'a ke'a zmadu ro nanmu ku poi na cmima ke'a kei leni xadni clani  ''The set of 17 men such that all the individuals therein exceed all men not therein in body length''
But there are also the ''primordial'' overtones of using a Loglan prim.


-- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]]
One could translate this, then: "Logick".
 
(''But sets don't seem to me to work with ''traji'', and I think that if you have more than a singleton in the x1 of ''traji'', they can reasonably be presumed to be ranked #1, #2, #3...'' -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]])
 
''Not merely presumed, because ##1-17 will collectively rank higher than any other 17mei selected from the same parent set. But the 17mei ranks superlatively not in height but in something like the property of having members that are taller than other members of the same parent set. Fatigue deters me from trying to say that in Lojban.'' -- [[jbocre: And Rosta|And Rosta]]: [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/9114] .


----
----


[[jbocre: Michael Helsem|Michael Helsem]] proposes (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/9093):
Using ''[http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?JAhA%20%2B%20CAI a'a]''...& some experimental [http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/index.php?jai%27a%20%26%20nai%27a perators].
 
* romoi sebi'o da'apazemoi fi leka cmalu  ''The (last) up to (17th from the bottom) in smallness''
 
(''I think this is cheating, but it does work. Still, that should be 18th from the bottom'' -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]])
 
Taking this the other way round, [[User:xorxes|Jorge Llambias]] proposes (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/9127):
 
;:I think we can use ''moi'' for this.
 
;:"The third tallest man" is: ''le cimoi be lei nanmu bei le ka clani''
 
;:Then we have:
 
*ro le su'epazemoi be lei nanmu bei le ka clani  ''Each of the up-to-17th tallest men.''
 
;:which can eventually be shortened to:
 
*ro le clani nanmu su'epazemoi  ''All of the [[jbocre: conventional description|conventional description]] {tall men} {at-most-17th in order}''
 
[[jbocre: And Rosta|And Rosta]] responds (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/9148):
 
;:I don't like that ''le'', because I think nonveridicality should be an exception to the norm and because "the third tallest man" may or may not be specific. In English it may mean "A certain man (he is the third tallest)", i.e. specific, or "Whichever of the men is third tallest", i.e. nonspecific.
 
;:But, change it to:
 
*ro lo su'e pa ze moi be lei nanmu bei tu'o ka ce'u clani  ''All of the [[jbocre: truthful description|truthful description]] at most 17th of the men in the ordering scheme "x is long"''
 
;:and I think that you have the best translation and that it should be  considered canonical.
 
(''I don't think that's anything more than an explicit formulation of''
 
*ro lo clani nanmu su'epazemoi
 
''But And is right -- this phobia of ''lo'' is overdone'' -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]])
 
(''Yes, it's a reformulation of Jorge's'' {ro le su'epazemoi be lei nanmu bei le ka clani}. ''-- mi'e And.'')
 
Let me just say that I think all the proposals below are extremely silly. I assume they came from a part of the thread before [[User:xorxes|xorxes]] pointed out that ''su'e'' exists. --[[jbocre: rab.spir|rab.spir]]
 
* Not maximally user friendly, perhaps. But it's a useful exercise to tease out the underlying logic of these things, even if we don't end up saying things that way. -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]].


----
----


[[User:Bob LeChevalier|Bob LeChevalier]] proposes (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/9106):
What do i want this for? Consider how one would translate the gnomic statement from ''Twin Peaks'': "The owl flies at midnight", where a nonliteral & nonspecific (or at least not directly metaphorical) meaning is clearly indicated:
 
* paze remna poi clamau da'apaze remna  ''17 men who are longer than all but 17 men''
 
and adds:
 
;:I don't think I would use ''traji/clarai'' unless they were all equally at the extreme, though in a tanru (''clarai remna'') that is not necessarily required.
 
[[jbocre: And Rosta|And Rosta]] responds, prodigiously (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/9140):
 
;:I thought this was a good answer, but on closer inspection I think it doesn't work. This is because I think it means that each of the 17 people is taller than all but 17 people. But you could fix this by changing it to:
 
*pa ze remna poi clamau da'a su'e pa ze remna  ''17 men who are longer than all but at most 17 men''
 
;:or
 
*pa ze remna poi clamau su'o da'a pa ze remna  ''17 men who are longer than at least all but 17 men''
 
;:The repetition of ''pa ze'' is unecessary:
 
*ro remna poi clamau da'a su'e pa ze remna  ''All men who are longer than all but at most 17 men''
 
*ro remna poi clamau su'o da'a pa ze remna  ''All men who are longer than at least all but 17 men''
 
;:But the repetition of ''remna'' is rather unsatisfying.
 
;:So:
 
*ro da poi ge da da'a su'e pa ze de clamau gi ri e ra remna  ''All x such that {x is longer than all but at most 17 y} where x and y are men''
 
*ro da poi ge da su'o da'a pa ze de clamau gi ri e ra remna  ''All x such that {x is longer than at least all but 17 y} where x and y are men''
 
;:Or, since the ''de'' should not be within the scope of the ''ge'':
 
*ro da poi xi pa ke'a (xi pa) da'a su'e pa ze de poi xi re ke'a xi pa e ke'a xi re remna ku'o clamau [[jbocre: ku'o|ku'o]]  ''All x such that x is longer than all but at most 17 y such that x and y are men --- with x and y handled through relativisation''
 
*ro da poi xi pa ke'a (xi pa) su'o da'a pa ze de poi xi re ke'a xi pa e ke'a xi re remna ku'o clamau [[jbocre: ku'o|ku'o]]  ''All x such that x is longer than at least all but 17 y such that x and y are men --- with x and y handled through relativisation''
 
;:This last pair is the best, I think.
 
To which nitcion adds that this use of SOV is perverse, and ''da'' clearly has scope over the relative clauses. In human-compatible Lojban this is:
 
*ro da poi da clamau da'a su'e pa ze de poi da .e ke'a remna
*ro da poi da clamau su'o da'a pa ze de poi da .e ke'a remna
 
And responds (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lojban/message/9188):
 
;:I said it the way I did partly because I enjoyed the opportunity to use subscripts on ''poi'' and ''ke'a'', and partly because it's not clear which modificands of relative clauses can be referred to within the relative clause by something other than ''ke'a''.
 
;:But, given your user-friendly version, why not go the whole hog:
 
*ro da poi da clamau da'a su'e pa ze de poi da .e de remna
*ro da poi da clamau su'o da'a pa ze de poi da .e de remna
 
----
 
(But perhaps in Lojbanistan they would just say something like:
 
*''galtu nanmu .i traji leka galtu .i rezemei'' --and leave the connections to inference?)
 
----
 
As a metanote, I think this stream of responses makes it obvious that any such questions should be asked on the [[jbocre: Lojban mailing list|Lojban mailing list]] and then compiled onto the wiki, rather than vice versa -- [[User:Nick Nicholas|nitcion]]
 
----
 
Lojban's claim to fame should be that it can find 17 different ways to attempt but fail to express this concept. What are the 17 longest sentences?
 
''.i na co'a xusra ledu'u la lojban cu jai frili .i ganai do djica tu'a loi nalylogji bangu gi do djuno ledu'u facki ri vi makau''
 
----
 
It seems to me a lot simpler to avoid the various problems with "le paze nanmu...", etc., and use variations of "le paze traji...".  I.e., rather than "the 17 men, who are are superlative in..."; use "the 17 superlative ones, in...among men".  What else could a quantifier on "le traji" mean?  Seems an obvious idiom to me.
 
The long form would be ''lo paze traji be le ka xadni clani bei fo lo'i nanmu ...''  which could be simplified with appropriate use of lujvo and tanru (''lo paze xdani clarai be fo lo'i nanmu ...'')
 
---
 
An unrelated discussion in [[Lojban IRC|Lojban IRC]] pointed out the cmavo va'e, which I thought would be useful for this, as long as you can express a range of numbers. Fortunately, there's bi'i:
 
''le pabi'ipazeva'e be leni traji leka xadni clani kei nanmu''
 
Additionally, depending on whether the nanmu is part of the sumti or in the be clause, can determine whether they are the seventeen tallest things, which happen to be men (the above example), or the seventeen tallest entities among men:
 
''le pabi'ipazeva'e be leni traji leka xadni clani nanmu''


mi'e [[jbocre: bancus|bancus]]
''fu'epe'a'' (or ''ja'acu'i''?) ''le glauka cu vofli ca le nicte midju''.


*''pabi'ipazeva'e'' is not currently grammatical, you need a pure number in front of ''va'e''. Or, ''me li pabi'ipaze va'e'' will also parse. mi'e [[User:xorxes|xorxes]]
Or Housman's "It rains into the sea,/ And still the sea is salt." Much ''more'' than a figurative statement, here... ''lo carvi le xamsi cu farlu .iseni'inaibo silna le xamsi''.

Revision as of 17:20, 4 November 2013

Why lodji & not logji?

logji: x1 is logic for reasoning about x2

lodji: x1 is logic for inferring x2 from x3

I wish to utilize the x3 place; i could as well have said:

logji fi'o jicmu le imei (or whatever)... le za'e jamro ?

But there are also the primordial overtones of using a Loglan prim.

One could translate this, then: "Logick".

Using a'a...& some experimental perators.

What do i want this for? Consider how one would translate the gnomic statement from Twin Peaks: "The owl flies at midnight", where a nonliteral & nonspecific (or at least not directly metaphorical) meaning is clearly indicated:

fu'epe'a (or ja'acu'i?) le glauka cu vofli ca le nicte midju.

Or Housman's "It rains into the sea,/ And still the sea is salt." Much more than a figurative statement, here... lo carvi le xamsi cu farlu .iseni'inaibo silna le xamsi.

Retrieved from "https://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=xo%27a_lodji_hoa&oldid=76441"