1) "Module" has approximately the same meaning as it does in Mathematica.

2) The requirement that the sumti that fills sei'au1 begin with li is an
artifact of mau'au (which produces a mekso operand) and not really of
this word. In a sense, this word takes (a series of) mekso expression(s)
and applies them to the linguistic structure of the bridi at a semantic
level.

3) This word is its own terminator and the terminator is mandatory. This is
rather odd in Lojban but I made this requirement for practical
considerations. Firstly, I did not want to use up another cmavo for the
terminator but it seemed advisable to me to have one, since the next sumti
can be anything and its typing will not necessarily be enough to
distinguish it. Second, realistically, this word will not be used to edit
the semantics of a structure multiple times in a row (but if the utterer
wishes to do so, this is still possible). Note that pi'u can reduce the
usage of this word as well. Thirdly, since this word is so clunky, it is
good to have multiple arguments within it, as defined, that way it need not
be used too often; however, this further motivates the need for a
terminator.

4) The language used for levels of syntactic nesting used in the notes is
rather metaphorical. I was unsure of how to be clear without being verbose.
In particular, "open selbri" are those which have not been terminated.

5) The afterthought (so long as the selbri is still open) capability is
useful. But this does mean garden-pathing/reinterpretation can be required
of the audience. Also, it complicates this word's usage (one has to be
careful with the arguments supplied). Additionally, the utility of
afterthought editing being supported further promotes the existence of a
terminator for this word.

6) If goi is used on the sumti of sei'au2, then the referent updates with
every new occurrence of the selbri (technically, after the occurrence of
the terbri) to which this word applies. Thus, this value is
context-dependent if used later in the discourse. This property is useful
for overriding one sei'au application for another or for referencing how
long one application has to remain active. This value decreases strictly
monotonically until it reaches 0, where it remains until the variable is
redefined.

7) This word really defines a new terbri which is newbroda_m =
f(broda_m) and replaces every occurrence of broda_m in the possibly
zmico-affected definition of the currently open selbri with newbroda_m
for the next n uses of the terbri (after which time, the definition
reverts to it previous (possibly zmico-affected) form). Any sumti which
fills this slot fills in newbroda_m. In order to be clear: It is not
'f(sumti)' that fills broda_m; it is 'sumti' which fills newbroda_m.

8) I was not sure that zi'a'o was the best way to manually revert
(temporarily) to the possibly zmico-affected definition. However, since f
may not have an inverse (and may not even be properly defined, depending on
how the influence of sei'au constructs overlap), it was best to define a
specific safety-word for this meaning. If you squint hard enough, this
choice even makes a lot of sense; on the other hand, it can be problematic
if one actually wants an elliptical or empty function.

Comment #2: Re: Notes on the Notes

Curtis W Franks (Thu Nov 26 05:39:23 2015)

krtisfranks wrote: "Module" has approximately the same meaning as it does in Mathematica. The requirement that the sumti that fills sei'au1 begin with li is an artifact of mau'au (which produces a mekso operand) and not really of this word. In a sense, this word takes (a series of) mekso expression(s) and applies them to the linguistic structure of the bridi at a semantic level. This word is its own terminator and the terminator is mandatory. This is rather odd in Lojban but I made this requirement for practical considerations. Firstly, I did not want to use up another cmavo for the terminator but it seemed advisable to me to have one, since the next sumti can be anything and its typing will not necessarily be enough to distinguish it. Second, realistically, this word will not be used to edit the semantics of a structure multiple times in a row (but if the utterer wishes to do so, this is still possible). Note that pi'u can reduce the usage of this word as well. Thirdly, since this word is so clunky, it is good to have multiple arguments within it, as defined, that way it need not be used too often; however, this further motivates the need for a terminator. The language used for levels of syntactic nesting used in the notes is rather metaphorical. I was unsure of how to be clear without being verbose. In particular, "open selbri" are those which have not been terminated. The afterthought (so long as the selbri is still open) capability is useful. But this does mean garden-pathing/reinterpretation can be required of the audience. Also, it complicates this word's usage (one has to be careful with the arguments supplied). Additionally, the utility of afterthought editing being supported further promotes the existence of a terminator for this word. If goi is used on the sumti of sei'au2, then the referent updates with every new occurrence of the selbri (technically, after the occurrence of the terbri) to which this word applies. Thus, this value is context-dependent if used later in the discourse. This property is useful for overriding one sei'au application for another or for referencing how long one application has to remain active. This value decreases strictly monotonically until it reaches 0, where it remains until the variable is redefined. This word really defines a new terbri which is newbrodam = f(brodam) and replaces every occurrence of brodam in the possibly zmico-affected definition of the currently open selbri with newbrodam for the next n uses of the terbri (after which time, the definition reverts to it previous (possibly zmico-affected) form). Any sumti which fills this slot fills in newbrodam. In order to be clear: It is not 'f(sumti)' that fills brodam; it is 'sumti' which fills newbrodam. I was not sure that zi'a'o was the best way to manually revert (temporarily) to the possibly zmico-affected definition. However, since f may not have an inverse (and may not even be properly defined, depending on how the influence of sei'au constructs overlap), it was best to define a specific safety-word for this meaning. If you squint hard enough, this choice even makes a lot of sense; on the other hand, it can be problematic if one actually wants an empty function.

Comment #3: Re: Notes on the Notes Curtis W Franks (Sun Sep 9 02:37:39 2018) krtisfranks wrote: > krtisfranks wrote: > > "Module" has approximately the same meaning as it does in Mathematica. > > The requirement that the sumti that fills sei'au1 begin with li is an > artifact of mau'au (which produces a mekso operand) and not really of > this word. In a sense, this word takes (a series of) mekso expression(s) > and applies them to the linguistic structure of the bridi at a semantic > level. > > This word is its own terminator and the terminator is mandatory. This is > rather odd in Lojban but I made this requirement for practical > considerations. Firstly, I did not want to use up another cmavo for the > terminator but it seemed advisable to me to have one, since the next sumti > can be anything and its typing will not necessarily be enough to > distinguish it. Second, realistically, this word will not be used to edit > the semantics of a structure multiple times in a row (but if the utterer > wishes to do so, this is still possible). Note that pi'u can reduce the > usage of this word as well. Thirdly, since this word is so clunky, it is > good to have multiple arguments within it, as defined, that way it need not > be used too often; however, this further motivates the need for a > terminator. > > The language used for levels of syntactic nesting used in the notes is > rather metaphorical. I was unsure of how to be clear without being verbose. > In particular, "open selbri" are those which have not been terminated. > > The afterthought (so long as the selbri is still open) capability is > useful. But this does mean garden-pathing/reinterpretation can be required > of the audience. Also, it complicates this word's usage (one has to be > careful with the arguments supplied). Additionally, the utility of > afterthought editing being supported further promotes the existence of a > terminator for this word. > > If goi is used on the sumti of sei'au2, then the referent updates with > every new occurrence of the selbri (technically, after the occurrence of > the terbri) to which this word applies. Thus, this value is > context-dependent if used later in the discourse. This property is useful > for overriding one sei'au application for another or for referencing how > long one application has to remain active. This value decreases strictly > monotonically until it reaches 0, where it remains until the variable is > redefined. > > This word really defines a new terbri which is newbrodam = f(brodam) > and replaces every occurrence of brodam in the possibly zmico-affected > definition of the currently open selbri with newbrodam for the next n > uses of the terbri (after which time, the definition reverts to it previous > (possibly zmico-affected) form). Any sumti which fills this slot fills in > newbrodam. In order to be clear: It is not 'f(sumti)' that fills > brodam; it is 'sumti' which fills newbrodam. > > I was not sure that zi'a'o was the best way to manually revert > (temporarily) to the possibly zmico-affected definition. However, since f > may not have an inverse (and may not even be properly defined, depending on > how the influence of sei'au constructs overlap), it was best to define a > specific safety-word for this meaning. If you squint hard enough, this > choice even makes a lot of sense; on the other hand, it can be problematic > if one actually wants an empty function. Why are (by far most of) the comments not displaying? They appear when I go to respond to this thread, just not when I am reading it. Comment #4: Re: Notes on the Notes Curtis W Franks (Sun Sep 9 02:38:47 2018) Why are (by far most of) the comments not displaying? They appear when I go > to respond to this thread, just not when I am reading it. krtisfranks wrote: > krtisfranks wrote: > > krtisfranks wrote: > > > > "Module" has approximately the same meaning as it does in Mathematica. > > > > The requirement that the sumti that fills sei'au1 begin with li is an > > artifact of mau'au (which produces a mekso operand) and not really of > > this word. In a sense, this word takes (a series of) mekso expression(s) > > and applies them to the linguistic structure of the bridi at a semantic > > level. > > > > This word is its own terminator and the terminator is mandatory. This is > > rather odd in Lojban but I made this requirement for practical > > considerations. Firstly, I did not want to use up another cmavo for the > > terminator but it seemed advisable to me to have one, since the next > sumti > > can be anything and its typing will not necessarily be enough to > > distinguish it. Second, realistically, this word will not be used to edit > > > the semantics of a structure multiple times in a row (but if the utterer > > wishes to do so, this is still possible). Note that pi'u can reduce the > > > usage of this word as well. Thirdly, since this word is so clunky, it is > > good to have multiple arguments within it, as defined, that way it need > not > > be used too often; however, this further motivates the need for a > > terminator. > > > > The language used for levels of syntactic nesting used in the notes is > > rather metaphorical. I was unsure of how to be clear without being > verbose. > > In particular, "open selbri" are those which have not been terminated. > > > > The afterthought (so long as the selbri is still open) capability is > > useful. But this does mean garden-pathing/reinterpretation can be > required > > of the audience. Also, it complicates this word's usage (one has to be > > careful with the arguments supplied). Additionally, the utility of > > afterthought editing being supported further promotes the existence of a > > terminator for this word. > > > > If goi is used on the sumti of sei'au2, then the referent updates with > > every new occurrence of the selbri (technically, after the occurrence of > > the terbri) to which this word applies. Thus, this value is > > context-dependent if used later in the discourse. This property is useful > > > for overriding one sei'au application for another or for referencing how > > long one application has to remain active. This value decreases strictly > > monotonically until it reaches 0, where it remains until the variable is > > redefined. > > > > This word really defines a new terbri which is newbrodam = > f(brodam) > > and replaces every occurrence of brodam in the possibly > zmico-affected > > definition of the currently open selbri with newbrodam for the next > n > > uses of the terbri (after which time, the definition reverts to it > previous > > (possibly zmico-affected) form). Any sumti which fills this slot fills in > > > newbrodam. In order to be clear: It is not 'f(sumti)' that fills > > brodam; it is 'sumti' which fills newbrodam. > > > > I was not sure that zi'a'o was the best way to manually revert > > (temporarily) to the possibly zmico-affected definition. However, since f > > > may not have an inverse (and may not even be properly defined, depending > on > > how the influence of sei'au constructs overlap), it was best to define a > > specific safety-word for this meaning. If you squint hard enough, this > > choice even makes a lot of sense; on the other hand, it can be > problematic > > if one actually wants an empty function. > > > Why are (by far most of) the comments not displaying? They appear when I go > to respond to this thread, just not when I am reading it.