- 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 "su'ei"
Comment #2:
interaction with JA/A
|
gleki (Wed Dec 24 09:29:36 2014)
|
se je = je. se exchanges the order of first two places.
broda je brode = brode se je broda
su'ei je. su'ei retains the order + exchanges the order + makes two previous meanings joined with je since "su'ei = se xi vei pa *.e* re".
So "su'ei je" is just "[broda je brode] je ke [brode je broda] ke'e"
With other prepositions it should become more interesting:
"su'ei jonai" is "[broda jonai brode] je ke [brode jonai broda] ke'e" Should we assume that this is self-contradiction or it's the same as "broda jonai brode"?
"su'ei ju" is "[cadzu ju citka] je ke [citka ju cadzu] ke'e"
Walking only and only if eating, and eating only and only if eating.
|
-
Comment #3:
Re: interaction with JA/A
|
gleki (Wed Dec 24 09:30:15 2014)
|
A copy reformatted:
se je = je. se exchanges the order of first two places.
broda je brode = brode se je broda
su'ei je. su'ei retains the order + exchanges the order + makes two previous meanings joined with je since "su'ei = se xi vei pa *.e* re".
So "su'ei je" is just "[broda je brode] je ke [brode je broda] ke'e"
With other prepositions it should become more interesting:
"su'ei jonai" is "[broda jonai brode] je ke [brode jonai broda] ke'e" Should we assume that this is self-contradiction or it's the same as "broda jonai brode"?
"su'ei ju" is "[cadzu ju citka] je ke [citka ju cadzu] ke'e"
Walking only and only if eating, and eating only and only if eating.
|
-
Comment #4:
Re: interaction with JA/A
|
Curtis W Franks (Wed Dec 24 18:50:16 2014)
|
gleki wrote: > A copy reformatted: > > se je = je. se exchanges the order of first two places. > > broda je brode = brode se je broda > > su'ei je. su'ei retains the order + exchanges the order + makes two > previous meanings joined with je since "su'ei = se xi vei pa *.e* re". > > So "su'ei je" is just "[broda je brode] je ke [brode je broda] ke'e" > > With other prepositions it should become more interesting: > > "su'ei jonai" is "[broda jonai brode] je ke [brode jonai broda] ke'e" > Should we assume that this is self-contradiction or it's the same as > "broda jonai brode"? FTTF & FTTF = FTTF. So, just «broda jonai brode».
> > "su'ei ju" is "[cadzu ju citka] je ke [citka ju cadzu] ke'e" > > Walking only and only if eating, and eating only and only if eating.
"Walking regardless of eating, and eating regardless of walking", you mean?
|
-
Comment #6:
Re: interaction with JA/A
|
gleki (Wed Dec 24 19:18:09 2014)
|
krtisfranks wrote: > gleki wrote: > > A copy reformatted: > > > > se je = je. se exchanges the order of first two places. > > > > broda je brode = brode se je broda > > > > su'ei je. su'ei retains the order + exchanges the order + makes two > > previous meanings joined with je since "su'ei = se xi vei pa *.e* re". > > > > So "su'ei je" is just "[broda je brode] je ke [brode je broda] ke'e" > > > > With other prepositions it should become more interesting: > > > > "su'ei jonai" is "[broda jonai brode] je ke [brode jonai broda] ke'e" > > Should we assume that this is self-contradiction or it's the same as > > "broda jonai brode"? > FTTF & FTTF = FTTF. So, just «broda jonai brode». > > > > > "su'ei ju" is "[cadzu ju citka] je ke [citka ju cadzu] ke'e" > > > > Walking only and only if eating, and eating only and only if eating. > > "Walking regardless of eating, and eating regardless of walking", you > mean?
ouch, it should have been jo!!!
|
-
|
|
|
Comment #5:
Re: interaction with JA/A
|
Curtis W Franks (Wed Dec 24 19:10:33 2014)
|
gleki wrote: > se je = je. se exchanges the order of first two places. > > broda je brode = brode se je broda > > su'ei je. su'ei retains the order + exchanges the order + makes two > previous meanings joined with je since "su'ei = se xi vei pa *.e* re". > > So "su'ei je" is just "[broda je brode] je ke [brode je broda] ke'e" > > With other prepositions it should become more interesting: > > "su'ei jonai" is "[broda jonai brode] je ke [brode jonai broda] ke'e" > Should we assume that this is self-contradiction or it's the same as > "broda jonai brode"? > > "su'ei ju" is "[cadzu ju citka] je ke [citka ju cadzu] ke'e" > > Walking only and only if eating, and eating only and only if eating.
What about with nonlogical connectives? Reciprocity might be useful or at least interesting in masses, jointness, and "respectively" phrases and /might might/ be so for sequences and some operations on sets.
|
-
Comment #7:
Re: interaction with JA/A
|
gleki (Wed Dec 24 19:32:14 2014)
|
krtisfranks wrote: > gleki wrote: > > se je = je. se exchanges the order of first two places. > > > > broda je brode = brode se je broda > > > > su'ei je. su'ei retains the order + exchanges the order + makes two > > previous meanings joined with je since "su'ei = se xi vei pa *.e* re". > > > > So "su'ei je" is just "[broda je brode] je ke [brode je broda] ke'e" > > > > With other prepositions it should become more interesting: > > > > "su'ei jonai" is "[broda jonai brode] je ke [brode jonai broda] ke'e" > > Should we assume that this is self-contradiction or it's the same as > > "broda jonai brode"? > > > > "su'ei ju" is "[cadzu ju citka] je ke [citka ju cadzu] ke'e" > > > > Walking only and only if eating, and eating only and only if eating. > > > What about with nonlogical connectives? Reciprocity might be useful or at > least interesting in masses, jointness, and "respectively" phrases and > /might might/ be so for sequences and some operations on sets.
"mi do su'ei prami" expands into "mi do prami ije do mi prami" which breaks "Don't copy yourself" programmer's rule but isn't that mind-breaking as su'ei or "se xi vei pa e re".
It's better to start from these expansions and at some more readable place like mriste rather than this forum.
Or you can have my another shorter answer for this: mi na pu pensi tu'a lo nalylogji terjonma'o vau u'iru'e
|
-
Comment #8:
Re: interaction with JA/A
|
gleki (Wed Dec 24 20:13:24 2014)
|
gleki wrote: > krtisfranks wrote: > > What about with nonlogical connectives? Reciprocity might be useful or > at > > least interesting in masses, jointness, and "respectively" phrases and > > /might might/ be so for sequences and some operations on sets. > > "mi do su'ei prami" expands into "mi do prami ije do mi prami" which > breaks "Don't copy yourself" programmer's rule but isn't that > mind-breaking as su'ei or "se xi vei pa e re". > > It's better to start from these expansions and at some more readable place > like mriste rather than this forum. > > Or you can have my another shorter answer for this: > mi na pu pensi tu'a lo nalylogji terjonma'o vau u'iru'e
we should distinguish between symmetrical connectives like je, joi, ce, jo'u, ju'e, bi'i, ku'a, pi'u, jo'e and assymetric like ja, jo, ju, bi'o, mi'i, ce'o, fa'u.
mi su'eifa'u do citka lo plise (su'ei) fa'u lo perli = Each of us eats both an apple and a pear. su'eimi'i can be for people living in 3d space inside a 4d hypercube thus every point for them is the centre and the surroundings. bi'o and ce'o can probably be used for describing oscilations.
as for ce'oi i dont know what it means.
|
-
|
|
|
|
Comment #9:
zo su'ei ce zo zu'ai ce zo zu'ai
|
gleki (Mon Mar 2 10:35:05 2015)
|
More discussion is in zu'ai and su'ai threads.
Although I previously said that zu'ai is better there is another option: to allow saying "mi ce do damba abu" = "mi ce do ce abu damba [zo'e???]" = "mi damba do ce abu" = "[zo'e???] damba mi ce do ce abu"
When su'ei is used damba2 could be assumed not to mean zo'e but simply ignored when creating the array ["mi","do","abu"].
It's convenient since:
1. You don't have to relearn the place structure of damba. It's still the same brivla. 2. "su'ei JA" won't require any special changes to parsers since nothing is zillified.
The first feature (put elements of an array as you wish) is rather sloppy.
The second feature can potentially it make better than zu'ai (although who stops you from saying "ko'a JA zu'ai"?)
|
-
Comment #10:
Re: zo su'ei ce zo zu'ai ce zo zu'ai
|
Alex Burka (Mon Mar 2 16:59:59 2015)
|
gleki wrote: > More discussion is in zu'ai and su'ai threads. > > Although I previously said that zu'ai is better there is another option: > to allow saying > "mi ce do damba abu" = "mi ce do ce abu damba [zo'e???]" = "mi damba do ce > abu" = "[zo'e???] damba mi ce do ce abu"
Did you mean to include a su'ei somewhere in this example?
|
-
Comment #11:
Re: zo su'ei ce zo zu'ai ce zo zu'ai
|
gleki (Tue Mar 3 06:15:42 2015)
|
durka42 wrote: > gleki wrote: > > "mi ce do damba abu" = "mi ce do ce abu damba [zo'e???]" = "mi damba do > ce > > abu" = "[zo'e???] damba mi ce do ce abu" > > Did you mean to include a su'ei somewhere in this example?
o'anaisai yes.
"mi ce do su'ei damba abu" = "mi ce do ce abu su'ei damba [zo'e???]"= "mi su'ei damba do ce abu" = "[zo'e???] su'ei damba mi ce do ce abu"
we need to use a wiki instead to be able to edit discussions.
|
-
|
|
|
|