krtisfranks wrote:
> Would you recommend using this word for mathematics (where one spells
> words over some alphabet of, say, group elements, yielding a quantity
> (which is called the word))?

How do you consider using valsi in a mathematical context?

I would use plain lerpoi (the definition I entered, by tsani), with
lerpoi1 being the sequence of generators and lerpoi3 being their value.

ci'e la'o gy.Klein four-group.gy.
me'o .abu cmarai lo lerpoi be fi li by. .abu by.


I guess you could alternatively use valsi (or a lujvo based on it) as

"x1 is a sequence of generators with value x2 in group presentation x3",

with valsi2 being the mathematical word.

me'o .abu cmarai lo valsi be li by. .abu by.
bei la'o gy.Klein four-group.gy.

Comment #3: Re: Mathematics

Wuzzy (Mon Jan 13 09:12:50 2014)

filipos wrote: > I would use plain lerpoi (the definition I entered, by tsani), with > lerpoi1 being the sequence of generators and lerpoi3 being their value. > > I guess you could alternatively use valsi (or a lujvo based on it) as > > "x1 is a sequence of generators with value x2 in group presentation x3", No, no, no, NO! That’s WAY too far off from the original definitions. Those definitions certainly would need new words.

Comment #4: Re: Mathematics Felipe Gonalves Assis (Mon Jan 13 22:35:00 2014) Wuzzy wrote: > filipos wrote: > > I guess you could alternatively use valsi (or a lujvo based on it) as > > > > "x1 is a sequence of generators with value x2 in group presentation x3", > No, no, no, NO! > That’s WAY too far off from the original definitions. > Those definitions certainly would need new words. Ok, this is more for fun than for the original point, but here is a PEG for the Klein group I <- e I | a A | b B | c C | eps A <- e A | a I | b C | c B B <- e B | a C | b I | c A C <- e C | a B | b A | c I More trivially, it is straightforward to define an attribute grammar for computing the product of a sequence of elements. So, we do have words (the sequences), interpretations for these words (the values) and rules for how to determine the meaning of a composition of them from its parts (the group operation). Comment #5: Re: Mathematics Curtis W Franks (Tue Jan 14 07:29:34 2014) filipos wrote: > Wuzzy wrote: > > filipos wrote: > > > I guess you could alternatively use valsi (or a lujvo based on it) > as > > > > > > "x1 is a sequence of generators with value x2 in group presentation > x3", > > No, no, no, NO! > > That’s WAY too far off from the original definitions. > > Those definitions certainly would need new words. > > Ok, this is more for fun than for the original point, but here is a PEG > for the Klein group > > I <- e I | a A | b B | c C | eps > A <- e A | a I | b C | c B > B <- e B | a C | b I | c A > C <- e C | a B | b A | c I > > More trivially, it is straightforward to define an attribute grammar for > computing the product of a sequence of elements. > > So, we do have words (the sequences), interpretations for these words (the > values) and rules for how to determine the meaning of a composition of > them from its parts (the group operation). That is what I was thinking. One could always tack on a seltau indicating 'math'-ness on some level.