- Home
- Get A Printable Dictionary
- Search Best Words
- Recent Changes
- How You Can Help
- valsi - All
- valsi - Preferred Only
- natlang - All
- natlang - Preferred Only
- Languages
- XML Export
- user Listing
- Report Bugs
- Utilities
- Status
- Help
- Admin Request
- Create Account
|
Discussion of "pevna"
Comment #1:
Syntax question
|
Wuzzy (Sun May 4 16:15:07 2014)
|
x3+1, 2
What does that strange syntax mean? I’ve never seen it before here.
|
-
Comment #2:
Re: Syntax question
|
Wuzzy (Sun May 4 16:15:44 2014)
|
The question: What does that strange syntax in the above post mean? I’ve never seen it before here.
|
-
Comment #3:
Lojban got an issue with specifying predicate structures
|
gleki (Sun May 4 16:28:10 2014)
|
Wuzzy wrote: > The question: What does that strange syntax in the above post mean? I’ve > never seen it before here.
This definition was taken from gua\spi.
x3+1,2 means that x3 place contains references (ce'u) to x1 and x2.
This also happens in pure Lojban words like with zmadu3 which has ce'u that refers equally to x1 and x2.
Unfortunately, Lojban doesn't specify: 1. sumti interactions (like in this case) 2. sumti types (not every place has clear specification of whether it can take a nu, du'u, object-type sumti or several of them, thus being polymorphic)
This led and continues to lead to sumti raisings, inability to understand different places.
I'm going to fix that in Simple English definitions at the same time dealing with the third issue:
3. many definitions of brivla are not ready for their memorization, they have many superfluous details that could safely go to "notes" (i.e. "comments") field.
|
-
Comment #4:
Re: Lojban got an issue with specifying predicate structures
|
Wuzzy (Sun May 4 18:13:46 2014)
|
Thanks, now I understand. You are talking about place names, but what has that to do with Lojban itself?
Place naming is just a convention here. Yeah, admittedly it is messy. But I don’t consider these place naming conventions (i.e. “x1”, “x2”) part of Lojban itself. So it’s not a problem with Lojban, it’s a problem with the conventions.
On the other hand, when these conventions are applied to a definition in Lojban, it gets even weirder, so that’s another problem.
Maybe these place naming conventions should be completely rethought.
A cool (partly) solution would be that jbovlaste stores information like that seperately.
|
-
Comment #5:
Re: Lojban got an issue with specifying predicate structures
|
gleki (Mon May 5 06:29:54 2014)
|
Wuzzy wrote: > Thanks, now I understand. > You are talking about place names, but what has that to do with Lojban > itself? > > Place naming is just a convention here. Yeah, admittedly it is messy. But > I don’t consider these place naming conventions (i.e. “x1”, > “x2”) part of Lojban itself. So it’s not a problem with Lojban, > it’s a problem with the conventions. > > On the other hand, when these conventions are applied to a definition in > Lojban, it gets even weirder, so that’s another problem. > > Maybe these place naming conventions should be completely rethought. > > A cool (partly) solution would be that jbovlaste stores information like > that seperately.
Even if x1, x2, x3 is a convention this convention is unable to reflect interactions of places of the same predicate.
Even if this is not the problem of Lojban it means currently Lojban is hugely underdocumented in its lexicon.
Not that there is not solution to it. I'm working on a new gismte (but it'll be ke'u in Simple English direction).
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|