--- Log opened Wed Jul 01 00:00:20 2015
--- Day changed Wed Jul 01 2015
00:00 < gleki> alta: lo noi xebni be le prokure vau tcadu cu mo
00:00 < mensi> ([FA {lo <(¹noi [{FA ZOhE} {CU <NS xebni NF (²be [FE {le <NS prokure NF> KU}]²) BEhO> vau}] KUhO¹) (¹NS tcadu NF¹)> KU}] [cu {NS mo NF} VAU])
00:01 < gleki> mensi: doi xalbo in "alta" hyperparser i made {lo noi xabni vau tcadu} parsable again.
00:01 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.xalbo.gy. di'a cusku da
00:15 < gleki> im not sure how {i broda noi} should work. compare { i broda noi mo noi mo}. either two {lonu} are to be injected before {broda} or the second is to be injected before {mo}.
00:15 < gleki> {i fasnu fa lo nu broda noi fasnu fa lo nu mo noi mo}?
00:16 < gleki> then where {ke'a} of the first relative clause should go to?
01:20 < akmnlrse> xu su'o .admine be lo BPFK mriste cu jundi
02:01 < gleki> en: admine
02:01 < mensi> admine = x1 administers x2 |>>> glekizmiku
02:04  * nuzba @fotono: lo #lojban zantufa tricu cu milxe banro .i coi ma'oi LOhOI .e ma'oi GOhOI .e lo so'o cnino cmavo http://guskant.github.io/gerna_cipra/zantufa_farvi.svg [http://bit.ly/1Hu1rgR]
02:27 < gleki> akmnlrse: oi clani
02:29 < akmnlrse> je'u .i pe'i xagmau lo nu na jungau
02:36 < gleki> ie i la ilmen so'usai roi jungau
02:38 < gleki> mensi: doi zipcpi i replied to ur case against lo: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Talk:zipcpi:_The_case_against_%22lo%22
02:38 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.zipcpi.gy. di'a cusku da
02:38 < gleki> fenki: tell gleki coi
02:38 < fenki> gleki: You can tell yourself that.
02:45 < gleki> fenki: doi gleki coi
02:48 < gleki> fenki: doi gleki coi
02:48 < gleki> fenki: tell gleki coi
02:48 < fenki> TypeError: not all arguments converted during string formatting (file "/home/gleki/fenki/modules/tell.py", line 114, in f_remind)
02:48 < gleki> je'e
02:49 < gleki> fenki: tell gleki coi
02:50 < gleki> fenki: doi gleki coi
02:50 < fenki> TypeError: not all arguments converted during string formatting (file "/home/gleki/fenki/modules/tell.py", line 114, in f_remind)
02:51 < gleki> fenki: doi gleki coi
02:51 < gleki> fenki: tell gleki coi
02:52 < gleki> fenki: doi gleki coi
02:52 < fenki> TypeError: not all arguments converted during string formatting (file "/home/gleki/fenki/modules/tell.py", line 114, in f_remind)
03:08 < zipcpi> Gleki: The two apples - yeah as you said that's somewhat unnatural. Any two apples - you just rendered it {lo}, which many people would also render the "the" case with
03:08 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: i replied to ur case against lo: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/
03:08 < mensi> Talk:zipcpi:_The_case_against_%22lo%22 | 2015-07-01T09:38:11.362Z
03:10 < zipcpi> And I'm not sure I like ca'e for definitional/essentialistic. {ca'e} means "It is true because I say so; I am, by fiat, defining a word to mean something, or perhaps I am doing something like assigning responsibility or some subjective value"
03:10 < zipcpi> That's the reason I made kairpau / kai'a, even though they both use the English word "define"
03:10 < gleki> zipcpi: that's the problem of English. namely, articles are necessary. In Russian there is no a/the articles needed.
03:10 < zipcpi> It means something rather different
03:11 < zipcpi> gleki: What about "any" though?
03:11 < gleki> how to say "source code"?
03:11 < gleki> zipcpi: {lo}
03:11 < gleki> if you mean your paper.
03:11 < gleki> en: code
03:11 < zipcpi> gleki: I mean Russian
03:11 < mensi> 8151 da se tolcri: mifra, banmu'isu, iunkoda, jvinjiata, jviso, jvisuai, samselpla, se'e, tolmifygau, aski, banbu'a'a,
03:11 < mensi> banbu'abu, banbu'acu, banbu'a'e, banbu'afu, banbu'agu, banbu'aje, banbu'aju, banbu'aku, banbu'alu, banbu'amu, banbu'anu,
03:11 < mensi> banbu'a'o, banbu'apu, banbu'aru, banbu'asu, banbu'a'u, banbu'ave, banbu'avu, banbu'axe, banbu'axu, banbu'azu, banbubu'a,
03:11 < mensi> banbububu, banbubucu, banbubudu, banbubu'e, banbubufu, banbubugu, banbubu'i, banbubuje, banbubuju, banbubuke, banbubuku,
03:11 < mensi> banbubulu, banbubumu, banbubunu, banbubu'o, banbubupu, banbuburu, banbubusu, banbubutu, banbubu'u, banbubuve, banbubuvu,
03:11 < mensi> banbubuxe, banbubuxu, banbubuzu, banbucu'a, banbucubu, banbucucu, banbucudu, banbucu'e, banbucufu, banbucugu, banbucu'i,
03:11 < mensi> banbucuje, banbucuju, banbucuke, banbucuku, banbuculu, banbucumu, banbucunu, banbucu'o, banbucupu, banbucuru, banbucusu,
03:11 < mensi> banbucutu, banbucu'u, banbucuve, ...
03:11 < gleki> oi
03:11 < gleki> zipcpi: additional word
03:12 < zipcpi> samselpla? Might not be very specific though, I dunno
03:12 < gleki> Russian/Spanish/English are very different in any/some/no distinction
03:12 < zipcpi> I need to refresh my memory on how Chinese does it...
03:12 < gleki> krasi uenzi? source text?
03:13 < gleki> krasi se platu? but platu is an event
03:13 < gleki> platu2
03:13 < zipcpi> Nah, that loses the programming sense
03:13 < gleki> .dict code
03:13 < fenki> code — noun: 1. A short symbol, often with little relation to the item it represents, 2. A body of law, sanctioned by legislation, in which the rules of law to be specifically applied by the courts are set forth in systematic form; a compilation of laws by public authority; a digest — verb:[...]
03:13 < gleki> (programming, uncountable) Instructions for a computer, written in a programming language; the input of a translator, an interpreter or a browser, namely: source code, machine code, bytecode.
03:13 < zipcpi> Well I was also looking for a word for "script" as in the acting sense
03:14 < gleki> .dict source code
03:14 < fenki> source code — noun: 1. (computing, uncountable) Human-readable instructions in a programming language, to be transformed into machine instructions by a compiler, assembler or other translator, or to be carried out directly by an interpreter
03:14 < zipcpi> I remember that Chinese used demonstratives if the deictic case is necessary
03:14 < zipcpi> zhe xie; na xie
03:14 < zipcpi> ~ tinoi / tanoi
03:14 < gleki> Russian is the same in this regard
03:15 < zipcpi> But the problem with that is that it extends Lojban demonstratives
03:15 < gleki> although not only xie
03:15 < zipcpi> zhei ge
03:15 < zipcpi> na ge
03:15 < gleki> zhe ge kafe, na ge kafe - this coffee, that coffee
03:15 < zipcpi> Yeah
03:15 < gleki> "ge kafe" is kinda werd tanru or even lujvo
03:15 < gleki> *weird
03:16 < zipcpi> But they are sometimes used metaphorically in a way that Lojban demonstratives often are prescribed not to be meant to be used that way
03:16 < gleki> en: compile
03:16 < mensi> 2 da se tolcri: samrkompli, bainri
03:16 < gleki> en: samrk[3~mompli
03:16 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
03:16 < gleki> en: samrkompli
03:16 < mensi> samrkompli = x1 is a file compiled from sources / resources x2 by compiler x3. |>>> True fu'ivla, borrowing "compile".
03:16 < mensi> Contextual type-4 kompili. The x1 can be used to refer to binaries or other compiled files. |>>>
03:16 < mensi> djeikyb
03:16 < zipcpi> I mean we *could*, but I'm not sure that's the best way to go. Especially the whole {ti noi} thing has that issue with the bridi tail anyway
03:17 < gleki> yes, in Lojban to work with text another set of words is used
03:17 < zipcpi> No, I don't mean text
03:17 < zipcpi> I mean something that isn't actualy present, or demonstratable
03:17 < gleki> how it can even be?
03:18 < zipcpi> I mean... like "the play you just watched", IIRC in Chinese you can use demonstratives metaphorically to refer to it
03:18 < gleki> i translated that example
03:18 < gleki> it's co'ephora
03:19 < zipcpi> Yes... which is also what you use {le} for
03:19 < zipcpi> Like I often say, there isn't much difference between our {le}s; we only disagree on the philosophy behind the definitions
03:19 < gleki> me? maybe. but that's me, and my {le} is just a convention
03:19 < gleki> my {le} is not needed
03:20 < gleki> UD, scope and variables/constants do all the work
03:20 < zipcpi> It's convenient though, that's my point, vs having to qualify {da} all the time
03:20 < gleki> hm, so "to compile" is "to translate"
03:21 < gleki> zipcpi: tersmu version 99.0.0.1 will have to do that anyway
03:21 < ctefa`o> ...coi
03:21 < gleki> en: uenzi
03:21 < mensi> uenzi = x1 is an utterance or text, in language x2 |>>> cusku, bangu, gerna |>>>
03:21 < mensi> ahernai
03:23 < gleki> Quelltext
03:23 < zipcpi> And I'm not sure {da} always means co'ephorical either
03:23 < gleki> {da} is about UD so yes
03:23 < zipcpi> I mean I suppose it has the preference of concreteness over abstractness
03:24 < gleki> i dont understand those words
03:24 < zipcpi> I mean in terms of su'a/lo'e generalizations
03:24 < zipcpi> Meaning that da tends to not mean su'a/lo'e
03:25 < zipcpi> Though I sometimes wonder about "Alice and Bob" discussions...
03:26 < gleki> en: mi'esku
03:26 < mensi> mi'esku [< minde cusku ≈ Command express] = x1=m1=c1 expresses/states command x2=c2 to recipient(s) x3=m2=c3 via
03:26 < mensi> expressive medium x4=c4. |>>> m3 of minde (the desired result) is presumably cointained in he expression of the command.
03:26 < mensi>  x1 commands x3 with expression x2. |>>> rlpowell
03:27 < zipcpi> samselpla: x1=p2 is computer program source code created by x2=p1 with intended result (state/process) x3=p3=s2 on computer x4=s1.
03:27 < zipcpi> Well I guess that lujvo is about as good as any other
03:29 < zipcpi> If I wanted to emphasize it I might make a tanru with {krasi} but I'm not sure if that's good
03:29 < gleki> luvjo: se minde cusku nu stika tutci
03:29 < zipcpi> A xavjvo? ie'i
03:29 < gleki> lujvo: se minde cusku nu stika tutci
03:29 < mensi> selmi'eskununtiktci[18143], selmi'ecusnuntiktci[18163], selmidyskununtiktci[18754], selmidycusnuntiktci[18774], selmindyskununtiktci[19784], ...
03:30 < gleki> se mi'esku nunstika tutci
03:30 < gleki> source code editor
03:30 < zipcpi> Oh
03:30 < zipcpi> se mi'esku isn't very specific though
03:30 < zipcpi> samselpla is probably better
03:31 < gleki> im not even sure it should be limited to computers
03:31  * ctefa`o cu ^^
03:31 < gleki> likewise compliation isnt necessary
03:31 < gleki> *compilation
03:32 < zipcpi> But if it isn't, then it's just a text editor
03:32 < gleki> it should run commands using source code. interpreters also use source code
03:33 < zipcpi> What kind of interpreters?
03:33 < zipcpi> They're all skami or skami-related right?
03:34 < gleki> .dict source code
03:34 < fenki> source code — noun: 1. (computing, uncountable) Human-readable instructions in a programming language, to be transformed into machine instructions by a compiler, assembler or other translator, or to be carried out directly by an interpreter
03:34 < gleki> hm, i can imagine using an animal or a huamn instead of a computer here
03:34 < gleki> *human
03:34 < zipcpi> But then you'd probably not use programming code
03:37 < zipcpi> The thing about "any" is this... all it means is that... there is a set I care about ("apples"), but the differences within the members of the set is not important to me
03:38 < zipcpi> Which really reminds me of {nalvaidza}, but I'm not sure I want a lujvo for that
03:38 < zipcpi> Maybe just for definitional purposes
03:42 < zipcpi> nalvaimenre
03:43 < zipcpi> re xe'e plise -> re nalvaimenre be lu'i lo plise
03:44 < zipcpi> Or lu'i ro plise, depending
03:44 < zipcpi> No wait... not sure if menre works on sets that way
03:44 < zipcpi> Perhaps just {lo plise} or {ro plise} is safer
03:46 < zipcpi> The difference between "Give me any two apples" and "Give me the two apples" is that "Which two apples?" is a meaningful question to the latter, not to the first
03:47 < zipcpi> Which is also similar to that "Which apple do you want" thing
03:47 < zipcpi> "Any one"
03:48 < zipcpi> Google translates any two apples as "Gěi wǒ rènhé liǎng gè píngguǒ"
03:49 < zipcpi> rènhé
03:49 < zipcpi> Not sure how natural that is
03:49 < zipcpi> 任何
03:50 < zipcpi> http://www.zdic.net/c/b/14a/325810.htm
03:51 < zipcpi> rexe'e le mu plise -> Any of the five apples -> re nalvaimenre be le mu plise
03:52 < zipcpi> Substitute {le} for {lo} if it makes you more comfortable here
03:59 < gleki> meaningful for the second due to being limited to UD
04:01 < zipcpi> What I mean about metaphorically-extended demonstratives is that IIRC "nage" would be acceptable for the play question
04:01 < gleki> ofc.
04:01 < gleki> Russian does the same
04:01 < zipcpi> Where you want to exophoricallly refer to the play, but it's not actually there for you to demonstrate
04:01 < gleki> most deictic pronouns or articles are derived from demonstrtatives
04:01 < zipcpi> Mm
04:02 < zipcpi> Yes, but in Lojban we want to avoid using ti/ta/tu for that. Also it's often useful to separate deictic/co'ephorical from demonstrative
04:02 < zipcpi> Well the latter is a subset of the former
04:02 < zipcpi> But yeah
04:04  * nuzba @palfem_kleet: @oka_iu_tcan というかHaskellのパッケージのところにProlog with lojban……． [http://bit.ly/1KqKQLy]
04:04 < gleki> you can say " I want these apples, aples that are here" - which ones?  - any
04:05 < zipcpi> Hence nalvaimenre
04:05 < zipcpi> xe'e is just a shorthand
04:08 < zipcpi> I sometimes wonder about {tu}
04:08 < gleki> it's just aquele in spanish
04:08 < zipcpi> Whether that might be extensible; since often you don't point to something that far away
04:09 < gleki> malgli
04:09 < zipcpi> "All you have to do is meet him there"?
04:09 < zipcpi> Maybe
04:10 < zipcpi> I do remember Malay has a three-level distinction too
04:10 < zipcpi> sini, situ, sana
04:10 < zipcpi> ~ bu'u ti, bu'u ta, bu'u tu
04:10 < zipcpi> Or vi va vu
04:11 < zipcpi> Hmm... could {vu} be deictic though? Cause IIRC correctly it just means "somewhere far"
04:11 < zipcpi> coi ilmen
04:12 < gleki> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YloC_1yVVs
04:12 < zipcpi> The thing is in Malay sana typically is beyond pointing
04:13 < zipcpi> Crap need Spanish subtitles
04:13 < zipcpi> Can't make out the phonemes
04:14 < gleki> i only linked to show the difference in meaning
04:14 < zipcpi> Ah
04:14 < zipcpi> Yeah I got it
04:15 < zipcpi> The whole close to me, close to you, somewhere beyond either of us
04:15 < zipcpi> Malay has three levels for places, but I think only two levels of demonstratives
04:16 < zipcpi> OK cool
04:16 < zipcpi> How to translate "meet him there" though?
04:16 < zipcpi> bu'u...
04:17 < zipcpi> bu'u le co'e
04:17 < zipcpi> Bah
04:17 < zipcpi> bu'u le vu co'e
04:17 < gleki> bu'u lo vu xo'i bu'u
04:17 < zipcpi> lol
04:18 < zipcpi> But wait you made {lo} mean any :p
04:18 < gleki> anywhere over there
04:18 < zipcpi> Nope
04:19 < zipcpi> Just "anywhere far away"
04:19 < zipcpi> Which... isn't right
04:19 < zipcpi> Yeah not practical, especially under xorlo where many people use {lo} for deictic as well
04:20 < zipcpi> And I still use {lo} the most, so...
04:20 < zipcpi> Not sure I really mean {nalvaimenre} everytime I use it
04:20 < zipcpi> Probably not
04:20 < zipcpi> Hey Ilmen another magic predicate for you :p
04:20 < gleki> ok, far away
04:21 < zipcpi> Some where far away, but somewhere specific; i.e. that place and not anywhere else
04:21 < gleki> oh, {bu'u da ne vu} then 
04:25 < zipcpi> I'd use {le vu co'e} myself, but whatever
04:26 < zipcpi> I mean it's not too much different from your use of {le fetsi} for she
04:27 < zipcpi> vu qualifies distance. co'e because {vu} and {bu'u} are all the semantic qualifiers we need
04:27 < zipcpi> I mean it could be {bu'u le vu stuzi} if we really wanted to avoid co'e
04:28 < zipcpi> https://tatoeba.org/eng/sentences/show/4207298
04:28 < gleki> as i said {le} is just a convenience. especially for such cases as Tatoeba where you need to emulate natlangs
04:29 < zipcpi> Well same argument for "over there"
04:30 < zipcpi> And it's not just malgli either. Chinese also uses the demonstrative 那
04:30 < zipcpi> And CKTJ wants bu'u -> zai lol
04:30 < gleki> malSAE then
04:30 < zipcpi> Well there's also bu on the page but I prefer zai; cause bu is still useful
04:31 < gleki> we need a word for SAE
04:31 < zipcpi> SAE = ?
04:31 < gleki> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Average_European
04:31 < zipcpi> Chinese ain't European
04:31 < gleki> hm, then i need one more word
04:32 < gleki> :P
04:32 < gleki> malmetfo then
04:32 < zipcpi> So yeah but my point is that Chinese doesn't have definite vs indefinite articles, but it also uses constructs to arrive at the same meaning
04:33 < zipcpi> Namely demonstratives
04:33 < gleki> same for russian
04:33 < zipcpi> But in Lojban we want to avoid using demonstratives for that; and I agree that the separation is sometimes helpful
04:34 < zipcpi> Hence perhaps the malgli solution is the best solution sometimes
04:37 < zipcpi> Hah under alta we won't even need co'e in that example
04:38 < zipcpi> exp: penmi le fetpre bu'u le vu
04:38 < zipcpi> Oh...
04:39 < gleki> cant see what happened. looks like some irc problem
04:40 < zipcpi> si'au la naxle na akti
04:40 < gleki> ofc.
04:41 < gleki> vrici problems
04:41 < gleki> la naxle is waiting for mensi to start
04:43 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/camxes-exp.html
04:43 < zipcpi> Yeah tested it there; but I wanted to test alta too
04:43 < zipcpi> alta: penmi le fetpre bu'u le vu
04:44 < mensi> ([FA ZOhE] [CU {penmi NF} {<FE (¹le [fetpre NF] KU¹)> <bu'u (¹le [vu COhE] KU¹)>} VAU])
04:44 < gleki> when will i incorporate all changes from ilmentufa and zantufa ...
04:44 < zipcpi> brb
04:53 < zipcpi> Back
04:54 < ghhtzt> le le le uenmo ku mutce ku mo
04:56 < zipcpi> Hm ju'ei is also useful within poi'i...
04:57 < ghhtzt> pehi naku ly. finti zo juhei
04:57 < zipcpi> ue la latro'a pu cusku lo sedu'u ly finti
05:02 < gleki> en: ju'ei
05:02 < mensi> ju'ei = [JUhEI] Tight scope bridi separator; analogous to .i without  ending the abstractor or relative clause. |>>> "nu
05:02 < mensi> broda ju'ei brode" is equivalent to "nu ju'e gi broda gi brode". Similarly "ko'a noi broda ju'ei brode" is equivalent to
05:02 < mensi> "ko'a noi ju'e gi broda gi brode". |>>> latros
05:02 < zipcpi> Starts a new bridi within a sub-clause
05:02 < zipcpi> Like NOI or NU
05:03 < zipcpi> ju'e isn't an adequate solution because it only accepts two
05:03 < zipcpi> So then you'd need extreme forethought if you want more than two, and ugly nested ju'egi constructs
05:04 < zipcpi> In fact I don't know what ju'e is good for lol
05:04 < gleki> sounds like curtis'es new cmavo
05:04 < gleki> en: ju'o'e
05:04 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
05:04 < gleki> en: je'o'e
05:04 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
05:05 < gleki> en: ji'o'e
05:05 < mensi> ji'o'e = connective: elliptical/generic/vague |>>> Like zo'e or co'e, but for connectives. The connectives referred to
05:05 < mensi> may be logical or non-logical; they take the form proper for the syntax/context (probably is best implemented using
05:05 < mensi> post-original CLL connective system modification such as the MAD proposal or the system developed by selpa'i); in
05:05 < mensi> standard original CLL usage, this would be the inter-tanru after-thought connective. Synonymous with but morphologically
05:05 < mensi> and phonotactically allowed version of .y'i. |>>> krtisfranks
05:05 < zipcpi> Oh that one. That one's a connective though, and I'm pretty sure that's not what ju'e/ju'ei means
05:06 < gleki> what else can bare {i} be for
05:06 < zipcpi> Are all .i -> .i ji'o'e?
05:06 < zipcpi> Dunno
05:06 < zipcpi> Ask Curtis lol
05:07 < gleki> wait no. conenctives bind scopes
05:08 < gleki> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/comments.html?valsi=27873;definition=63971
05:08 < gleki> and i said that myself O_0
05:08 < zipcpi> Right
05:09 < gleki> and even worked on alta after that O_0
05:10 < zipcpi> lol gleki have you been drinking? zo'oxo'osai
05:10 < gleki> did xo'osai just modified zo'o?
05:10 < zipcpi> ... dunno
05:10 < gleki> i think not
05:11 < zipcpi> Can't connect UI x.x
05:12 < zipcpi> There's toi'e but no equivalent to anti-toi'e
05:12 < zipcpi> Or UI-je
05:13 < ghhtzt> uidje
05:13 < zipcpi> u'i
05:22 < ghhtzt> mo fado doi jainu dahi spirofu
05:22 < zipcpi> Hm i'au can also be used for sumtcita. Or just for closing sumti with a lot of subclauses to continue the main bridi
05:56 < zipcpi> dacti is a physical object; how to refer to "object" in the abstract, agnostic as to physicality?
05:56 < zipcpi> Like in programming
05:56 < zipcpi> dzadza maybe lol
05:56 < gleki> you may paste a piece of code and we'll translate that
05:57 < zipcpi> No wait dzadza is a number
05:57 < zipcpi> No, it's not code; it's the concept of an object in OOP
05:58 < zipcpi> Also useful when we're talking about "objects" that sumti refer to in Lojban
05:59 < zipcpi> Was thinking of using that to define nalvaimenre, but {da} might do for now
06:02  * ctefa`o warms up a big fiery fire
06:02  * ctefa`o throws appx half of last week's ideas on it
06:03 < ctefa`o> hey guys
06:04 < ctefa`o> .i fa mi noi do'e ke'a barda cu klama
06:04 < ctefa`o> How to expandorino?
06:11 < zipcpi> do'e mi barda .ije mi klama ?
06:12 < samcinki> join #ckule
06:12 < zipcpi> ... fail?
06:16 < ctefa`o> .ije xmm
06:22 < ctefa`o> Kinda works but comletely kills more advanced expansions
06:24 < zipcpi> Well I'm not sure what else you mean by "expand". Also it can be as long as you want, with complicated logical groupings I might not be quite sure how to use
06:24 < zipcpi> But expansions need not be pretty
06:25 < ctefa`o> My hair rises from any in-sentence expansion suddenly crossing a sentence boundary
06:26 < zipcpi> Hmm... that... not sure how to fix that
06:26 < zipcpi> Cause that's also how I expand {be}
06:26 < zipcpi> I guess maybe {poi'i}?
06:27 < zipcpi> lo me mi je poi'i do'e ke'a barda cu klama...
06:27 < zipcpi> Not sure if that's any better
06:28 < ctefa`o> pe'i Not really
06:28 < zipcpi> But that's part of the problem... I think like a programmer, you see, so if you ask me to expand objects that have sub-predicates, I automatically split them into several statements
06:28 < zipcpi> Declare all my values, then use them
06:28 < ctefa`o> I want that noi do'e added to a bridi trail
06:29 < zipcpi> xoi? Not sure that's the best solution. I mean you can use {xoi do'e lo me'au ke'a cu barda} but...
06:30 < ctefa`o> I want the clause in the noi do'e added to a bridi trail/tail of mi klama
06:31 < zipcpi> If you don't mean xoi, I don't know what else you mean
06:31 < ctefa`o> 15:04 <ctefa`o> .i fa mi noi do'e ke'a barda cu klama
06:31 < zipcpi> No, I mean how you want it expanded
06:32 < zipcpi> You don't want multiple sentences, you don't want xoi, so what do you mean
06:32 < ctefa`o> 15:30 <ctefa`o> I want the clause in the noi do'e added to a bridi trail/tail of mi klama
06:32 < zipcpi> I don't know what you mean by bridi tail
06:32 < ctefa`o> sub-bridi?
06:32 < zipcpi> {mi klama jecu jai do'e barda}?
06:33 < ctefa`o> lmao
06:33  * ctefa`o gives up, goes to study connective system in-depth
06:33 < zipcpi> That's the second use of jai; to move a sumtcita place to x1
06:34 < zipcpi> The real x1 is then moved to fai
06:34 < zipcpi> mi jai gau barda fai ti -> gau mi barda fa ti
06:34 < zipcpi> Or gau mi ti barda
06:35 < ctefa`o> So where did klama go
06:35 < zipcpi> {mi klama jecu jai do'e barda}
06:36 < ctefa`o> expand jai
06:36 < zipcpi> I can't without another sentence
06:36 < zipcpi> Because {jecu} would reuse all sumti before the first bridi tail
06:36 < ctefa`o> Then it is not the solution I seek
06:37 < zipcpi> Well there's nothing else. You are making two statements about {mi}
06:37 < ctefa`o> iep
06:38 < zipcpi> So if you don't want two statements, if you don't want xoi-me'au-hacks, you don't want jecu, there's nothing else
06:38 < ctefa`o> I want jecu without a jai
06:38 < zipcpi> Impossible, because the do'e place needs to be moved to the x1
06:39 < ctefa`o> I actually have 1 solution but it doesn't work in all cases either
06:40 < ctefa`o> But the real nightmare is xoi on sub-bridi
06:40 < zipcpi> And jecu is simply shorthand for {ije} while reusing the sumti before the bridi tail
06:41 < zipcpi> Usually the x1
06:41 < ctefa`o> Maybe .ije is what I want then
06:42  * ctefa`o goes back to study connectives in-depth
06:42 < zipcpi> Yeah... perhaps you are taking {.i} too literally. Often what English uses ", and" for, gets translated into .ije in Lojban
06:42 < zipcpi> Thus Lojban counts two sentences where English only counts one
06:43 < menli> broda .ije brode == ge broda gi brode
06:43 < mensi> menli: cu'u la'o gy.Ilmen.gy.: da bu'a | 2015-06-04T21:46:26.298Z
06:43 < mensi> menli: cu'u la'o gy.Ilmen.gy.: de na bu'a | 2015-06-04T21:46:53.018Z
06:43 < zipcpi> Oh yeah that's another "solution"
06:44 < menli> {.ije} doesn't behave like {.i}, because in the former case da-variables within zo'u prenexes span over both bridi
06:44 < zipcpi> True
06:44 < menli> si both of the ije-linked  bridi
06:44 < menli> which isn't the case with {da zo'u broda .i brode}
06:45 < ctefa`o> Hmm I wasn't aware of that. .ije may be what I seek then
06:45 < menli> {.ije} is like it's own word, you shouldn't pay too much attention to the {.i} part :p
06:45 < menli> zo'o ru'e
06:46 < ctefa`o> Well I need to fully understand the connectives anyway to make a formal expandalizer. Might as well learn that now.
06:47 < menli> tersmus: da zo'u da brode .i je da brodo
06:47 < menli> .ui nai la .tersmus. na jundi
06:47 < ctefa`o> Does the .ije interfere with anaphoric sentence sumti?
06:49 < menli> I don't really know. I seem to recollect that go'i usage disregards .ije, but I'm unsure.
06:49 < ctefa`o> pro-sumti*
06:50 < zipcpi> When I'm doing expansions I tend to use lerfu-sumti or goi anyway
06:50 < menli> I mean, that in the case of {broda .i je brode .i go'i}, I think in usage go'i refers only to {brode}. But then I'm unsure.
06:50  * ctefa`o cringe
06:50 < zipcpi> Much better than relying on anaphora for such situations
06:51 < zipcpi> Anaphora are only shorthand. It'd be extremely difficult or impossible to do an expansion in such a way as to not touch them at all
06:51 < zipcpi> touch -> change their values
06:52 < ctefa`o> Welcome to my job
06:52 < zipcpi> I don't see the point. Anaphora are only shorthand
06:52 < menli> Things like {ri xi N} rely on the surface sentence encoding, and not on the underlying logical proposition
06:53 < zipcpi> Anaphora themselves get expanded, and their referent relies on the source, not the expansion
06:53 < ctefa`o> Well if you insist I can make my generalized formal expander STT only
06:54 < ctefa`o> And you can have one version each for regular jbobau to suit your personal usage:)
06:54 < menli> For example, logically {lo brode lo brodo cu broda} = {lo brodo lo brode cu se viska}. Yet, {lo brode lo brodo cu broda .i ri brodu} ≠ {lo brodo lo brode cu se broda .i ri brodu}
06:55 < ctefa`o> I am not saying it is going to be easy.
06:55 < menli> So in order to extract the referent of {ri}, you have to analyze the surface sentence and the order in which its elements appear
06:55 < zipcpi> I'm saying that there is no point; your expander will have to rely on the source to expand anaphora anyway
06:57 < zipcpi> Anaphora depends on surface structure of the source, not the logical form
06:57 < menli> anaphora are kinda part of the source / surface representation; they have to be logically expanded as well if you want to fully get ride of the surface representation and only keep the underlying logical proposition
06:57 < menli> if I'm not mistaken
06:57 < menli> *get rid
06:57 < ctefa`o> I have nothing more to say. I am going to study connectices now and can't focus on chat for a while. co'o
06:58 < menli> co'o di'ai
06:58  * menli quietly paces back into the shadows
07:11 < menli> http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=Expansion_of_logical_connections
07:12 < menli> Also, you should play around with tersmus (it's available on github I think), as it's already a pretty complete expander to logical forms
07:12 < menli> https://gitorious.org/tersmu/
07:13 < menli> mu'o
07:34 < gleki> maybe i should try grouping gismu into te bridi klesi
07:35 < gleki> alta: lo broda cu brode
07:35 < mensi> ([FA {lo <broda NF> KU}] [cu {brode NF} VAU])
07:35 < gleki> actually it's quite easy to detect words that are to be translated as nouns now.
07:36 < gleki> those are just NF KU
07:36 < gleki> SF is gone ofc.
07:38  * nuzba @osa_k: context free grammars - Lojban    http://mw.lojban.org/papri/context_free_grammars [http://bit.ly/1KsOgiC]
07:40  * nuzba @uitki: context free grammars - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/context_free_grammars by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1KsOpTh]
07:54  * nuzba @L16777216: 東工大、みんなEsperantoの話してばかりだし、lojban勉強会みたいなのしよーぜ [http://bit.ly/1KsPxWO]
07:54  * nuzba @tokoro10g: lojban講習会？？ [http://bit.ly/1KsPElb]
07:54  * nuzba @tokoro10g: Lojban For Beginners — velcli befi la lojban. bei loi co'a cilre http://www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/lojbanbrochure/lessons/book1.html [http://bit.ly/1KsPDha]
07:56  * nuzba @L16777216: lojbanがEsperantoに対して優れている点として、lojbanだと合成語が一意に分解できるというのがあるらしいが、こういうの東工大の人は好きそうじゃない？ [http://bit.ly/1KsQ9M9]
08:02  * nuzba @L16777216: lojbanだと括弧があるというか構文木が見えるから楽しい [http://bit.ly/1KsQJd1]
08:02  * nuzba @tokoro10g: やいやい言わずにわかりやすそうな方で学習してみるか，lojban [http://bit.ly/1KsQKgX]
08:02  * nuzba @L16777216: lojbanの紹介で行きつくところ、ここなんだよな    頭が赤い魚を食べた猫 - Togetterまとめ http://togetter.com/li/567493 [http://bit.ly/1KsQOgz]
08:04  * nuzba @tokoro10g: lojban勉強会？？？ [http://bit.ly/1KsQRsP]
08:04  * nuzba @L16777216: 萌え萌え(死語)なlojban教材ないものかね [http://bit.ly/1KsQYoh]
08:38 < ghhtzt> mu
08:46 < ghhtzt> lu mu~~~~ cu voi lo sofybakni ki cusku tahe.
09:04 < ghhtzt> lu ienai cu voi lo jbopre ki cusku tahe.
09:06 < so-uai-du-iu> ije lo gohi cu voi do cusku
09:10 < ghhtzt> ienai
09:12 < ghhtzt> domodoi matnysfani
09:12 < so-uai-du-iu> zo matnysfani
09:12 < so-uai-du-iu> i
09:14 < so-uai-du-iu> xrm. i lo ni lo nu diha tahe pilno lo bangu cu nandu cu bramau lo jai se kanpe.
09:17  * ctefa`o rubs hands
09:17 < ghhtzt> ii
09:17 < ctefa`o> Latest round of crazy ideas are now ready
09:20 < samsunga> doi nictyfam. lenu ko'a se bangu ko'e na se sarcu lenu ko'a mulno jimpe ko'e
09:22  * nuzba @lojytan_bot: はじめてのロジバン(http://w.livedoor.jp/hajiloji/d/)を作っています。今までにはないゆるふわな感じの講座を目指しているので、ロジバンに興味のある方はどうぞ！#lojban #はじめてのロジバン #ロジバン [http://bit.ly/1Jx3MKb]
09:22 < ghhtzt> mi senpi gajenai lo du fenki ginai lo du na cizrymau la gadganzu
09:34  * xalbo comes out of his cave, waves his fist ineffectually at the damn kids to get off his lawn and stop misusing {voi}, and goes back into his cave.
09:39  * ghhtzt cu voi ki djica lonu ki jiha ponse su kevna zdani poi lamji fa su srasu foldi
09:40  * samsunga cu barkla lemi kevna gi'e ckaji lenu mi sligau lemi bolxa'e fa'a le mabla verba noi se zukte fi lenu ri canci lemi sasfoi gi'e co'u malpilno zo lo kei gi'e za'ure'u nerkla le kevna
09:51 < ctefa`o> voi xalbo
09:51 < ctefa`o> si si xoi xalbo
09:53  * nuzba @tarik_saz: Gece gece arkadaslarla takIlmaktayIz... @ jumeirah  lojban https://instagram.com/p/4mdQyZMRza/ [http://bit.ly/1FRvMQM]
09:54 < ctefa`o> sa poi xalbo
09:54 < ctefa`o> su joi xalbo
09:54  * ctefa`o cu sisti
09:55 < samsunga> ki'e le dragau .i mi na se slabu ro lei mabla cnino
09:57 < ghhtzt> mijiha pirolei mabla cnino na se slabu
10:00 < mikrysofto> zohoi h coha misno
10:01 < samsunga> Unrecognizable word 'zohoi' at line 1 column 1
10:02 < samsunga> ju'inai ju'inai
10:05 < keidji> coi ro do
10:05 < samsunga> coi la keidjis.
10:06 < mikrysofto> ju'i la samsunga
10:06 < samsunga> re'i la mikryralci
10:07 < mikrysofto> ju'i la samsunga
10:07 < samsunga> mo
10:07 < mikrysofto> do se panci lo skami
10:08 < keidji> Who can I talk to about jbovlaste? Specifically XML export
10:08 < samsunga> mi se nandu lenu jimpe lenu ta'i makau ka'e se panci le na ka'e nerkla be le nazbi
10:08 < samsunga> keidji: la mukti ka'e sidju
10:08 < mikrysofto> sa'u lo dacti cu dirce lo panci
10:09 < mikrysofto> keidji: go on, what is it bothering you
10:12 < keidji> Clicking on the "XML Export" link for jbovlaste, it takes me to a new HTML web page
10:12 < keidji> I was hoping it would export a structured XML document I could download.
10:13 < gleki> no, it's not html
10:13 < gleki> just save it, it's an xml file
10:14 < gleki> it's just your browser rendering it as a web page
10:14 < gleki> done for your convenience
10:14 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/ircbot/dumps/
10:14 < samsunga> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="jbovlaste.xsl"?>
10:15 < gleki> ^ that link is the same  but you can see file extensions
10:15 < keidji> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/export/xml-export.html
10:15 < mukti_> Gleki: could you delete "Kevin Stringfellow" from the Facebook group?
10:15 < mukti_> Mobile interface won't let me
10:16 < keidji> gleki: Ah! *MUCH* better.
10:16 < keidji> ki'ecai
10:18 < gleki> mukti_: i think what keidji just told is a bug
10:19 < gleki> keidji: arent you logged in into jbovlaste?
10:19 < keidji> nope. quick and dirty just wanted the XML
10:19 < gleki> then that link
10:19 < gleki> keidji: btw pls log in and upvote 5 questions here area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
10:19 < keidji> the XML export link is available to the public
10:19 < durka42> if you aren't logged in there is a captcha
10:20 < keidji> gelki: I have already upvoted
10:20 < gleki> keidji: all 5?
10:20 < keidji> yup
10:21 < gleki> durka42: pls try doing that without logging in using incognito mode
10:22 < durka42> http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~aburka/tmp/Screen%20Shot%202015-07-01%20at%201.22.13%20PM.png
10:25 < durka42> gleki: this is why bots like vlasisku and mensi have to store their session cookie
10:25 < gleki> strange.
10:25 < gleki> and ur browser is strange too :)
10:26 < gleki> keidji: your bug report isnt confirmed. if u want u can list the steps you took to get that bug
10:28 < samsunga> la tricu staile tapla cu ge ka prami gi ka jmive
10:29 < gleki> uanai
10:30 < samsunga> http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/_treestyletab.html.en (to .o'i rinka lenu lenu gunrivzu'e cu zenba leni frili toi)
10:31 < gleki> ua
10:33 < gleki> la romge na kakne
10:42 < keidji> gleki: 1. (Using Safari 8.0.7 [shut up, I don't care]) Navigate to http://jbovlaste.lojban.org  2. Click the "XML Export" link  3. Click the "English" link  4. Complete the Captcha  5. Page is loaded as xml-export.html with otherwise unparseable nodes. EXPECTED: XML document is generated and downloaded.
10:45 < samsunga> keidji: when I save that generated page it's saved as parsable XML (using Chromium and Firefox though)
10:46 < samsunga> the extension is wrong, ie
10:46 < keidji> Well, when I download the page and change it to .xml
10:46 < keidji> the nodes are still messed up (dd, dl, dt). The nodes are set up for the stylesheet that comes with it
10:47 < samsunga> ue
10:48  * samsunga assumes Safari saves the result of the transform instead of the original
10:50 < keidji> Not sure why it would do that at all..........fair enough. The bot dump is perfectly usable. Thanks.
10:51 < gleki> indeed, one could just add a link to the dumps that would be downloaded e.g. every day
10:55 < bigcentaur> i have a question about using mekso as quantifiers
10:56 < gleki> go on
10:57 < gleki> bigcentaur: btw pls log in and upvote 5 questions that have rating below 10 here area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
10:58 < bigcentaur> so the cll says i'm allowed to put mathematical expressions as quantifiers of descriptions, e.g. {mi ponse su'o ci cutci}
10:58 < gleki> yes
10:58 < bigcentaur> let's say i wanted to make the mathematical expression more complicated
10:59 < bigcentaur> if i were translating say macbeth act 1 scene 3: "Weary se'n nights nine times nine / Shall he dwindle, peak and pine"
10:59 < bigcentaur> imagine i want to quantify a week and say "9 times 9 weeks"
11:00 < bigcentaur> if i write {so pi'i so jeftu} and try to use that in a sentence, camxes goes red
11:00 < gleki> exp: so pi'i so jeftu
11:00 < mensi> ([{<so BOI> <pi'i (¹so BOI¹)>} jeftu KU] VAU)
11:01 < gleki> you want {lo jeftu be li so pi'i so} btw
11:01 < latro`a> just did my SE votes
11:01 < gleki> latro`a: all 5?
11:01 < latro`a> yep
11:01 < bigcentaur> right, but now i'm just curious about why camxes is kicking up a fuss about it
11:02 < bigcentaur> http://www.lojban.org/camxes/?text=so+pi%27i+so+jeftu
11:02 < gleki> no idea. this camxes might have bugs that are unlikely to be ever fixed
11:02 < gleki> mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/camxes-exp.html
11:02 < latro`a> as I recall you wind up needing at least one paren to put a MEX in a quantifier
11:02 < gleki> ^ better
11:02 < latro`a> vlaste: parenthesis
11:02 < vlaste> 3 results: to, toi, koi'e
11:02 < latro`a> bah
11:03 < latro`a> what was the mex parenthesis again
11:03 < gleki> vei?
11:03 < latro`a> ve'o is the right one, I think
11:03 < latro`a> vei is the left one
11:03 < latro`a> camxes: veii so pi'i so jeftu
11:03 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "j" found.
11:03 < latro`a> camxes: vei so pi'i so jeftu
11:03 < camxes> ([{vei <(¹so BOI¹) (¹pi'i [so BOI]¹)> VEhO} jeftu KU] VAU)
11:03 < bigcentaur> ah, too bad
11:03 < latro`a> I'm not sure whether this is a bug or a feature
11:03 < gleki> latro`a: u upvoted a question that hd 11 votes already. please unvote it and upvote something else :)
11:04 < latro`a> ki'e
11:04 < latro`a> I know that in the YACC parser, those sorts of parens were necessary
11:05 < latro`a> actually, that's why ME SUMTI MOI is a thing
11:05 < latro`a> historically
11:05 < latro`a> because MOI was unable to take MEX by itself, so instead of writing MEX MOI you would write me li MEX MOI
11:07  * nuzba @lojytan_bot: これはものすごく個人的な意見ですが、lojbanの音体系はそんな特筆すべき魅力がないように思うのですが、どうなんでしょう？ [http://bit.ly/1IOiUwX]
11:09 <@xalbo> Yes, I'm fairly certain the reason is a parser limitation. But I agree, I'm not sure whether it's really a bug or a feature. You can definitely get there, and it's actually sort of nice being warned up front that something complicated is going on pe'i
11:09 < mensi> xalbo: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: in "alta" hyperparser i made {lo noi xabni vau tcadu} parsable again. |
11:09 < mensi> 2015-07-01T07:01:08.468Z
11:09 <@xalbo> ki'e la gleki
11:09 <@xalbo> .i'e
11:10 < bigcentaur> thanks for the help :)
11:11 <@xalbo> (and yes, the best answer is {lo jeftu be li so pi'i so}, but that is missing the point)
11:12 <@xalbo> .i la .leks.lutor. cu zerle'a vono titnanba no'u vei vo pi'i pano titnanba .i tcepalci
11:12 < zipcpi> Hm interesting http://mw.lojban.org/papri/punctuation
11:13 < zipcpi> Hm I like semicolon as a "natlang comma" better
11:13 < zipcpi> Well maybe it'd be useful to have two levels sometimes
11:13 < zipcpi> Their hyphen contradicts mine though
11:14 < zipcpi> And is not parseable probably
11:14 < zipcpi> Well I thought kg- -> kygy, but apparently here it's used as a selbri
11:14 <@xalbo> it's probably meant as shorthand for {ki'ogra}
11:15 < zipcpi> Yeah
11:15 < zipcpi> Might be useful to have some kind of lerfu-string equivalent for selbri though
11:15 <@xalbo> There was a really old convention of using an initial - as a makeshift me'oi. {.i mi citka lo -quiche}
11:16 <@xalbo> (Well, to fill the role that was eventually also filled by {me'oi})
11:17 < zipcpi>  lerfu-string equivalent for selbri: Could be {me'au}. {cei me'au kygy}
11:17 < gleki> 14 lojbanists have used all their upvotes by far
11:17 < zipcpi> A bit long though
11:18 < zipcpi> Another crazy idea I had was perhaps reserve all zam+[Xu/xe/ke/ve/je] zi'evla
11:18 < zipcpi> Actually that would also include some gismu
11:18 < zipcpi> Not sure if any gismu already exist in that space
11:19 < zipcpi> Essentially, zam being the rafsi of zai'e/za'e, and the syllables acting like the ISO zi'evla
11:19 <@xalbo> There are no /zam../ gismu yet.
11:20 < zipcpi> zamru would clash with zanru though :p
11:21 < zipcpi> Not sure I care too much about that though; these are only for cei assignments, not meant for permanent definition
11:21 <@xalbo> Would ?{zamcu} clash with {samcu}? I haven't internalized those rules yet.
11:21 < zipcpi> I think so
11:21 < zipcpi> I don't know those rules completely eiethr
11:22 < zipcpi> Not to menting {zamje} definitely clashes with {zamju}
11:22 < zipcpi> Oh and {zamzu} is banned >.<
11:22 < zipcpi> Whyyyyy
11:22 < gleki> nz
11:22 < zipcpi> Oh {zammu} definitely won't work either
11:23 < zipcpi> At this point I would really make the CLL-whale cry by using {zamyzu}, {zamymu}, etc lol
11:24 < akmnlrse> zagzu zagmu
11:24 < akmnlrse> rafsi: zag
11:24 < mensi> zo zargu se rafsi zo'oi zag
11:24 < zipcpi> u'i
11:25 < zipcpi> Well could save myself the trouble if I was willing to accept {zamr-} {zamn-} as a prefix
11:25 < akmnlrse> ki'u tu'a lo karsna zo'u .ei pilno zo'oi zamn-
11:26 < akmnlrse> .i lu za mrabu li'u zo zamnabu
11:27 < zipcpi> Or...
11:27 < zipcpi> exp: brodabu
11:27 < mensi> (CU [brodabu VAU])
11:27 < zipcpi> exp: broda'abucu
11:27 < mensi> (CU [broda'abucu VAU])
11:27 < zipcpi> Infinite brodV space
11:28 < akmnlrse> zipcpi: ta'o tu'a lo re plise zo'u do mo lo nu da'i zo ko ka'e se sko'opu na'e bo lo brarai
11:29 < zipcpi> I'm not sure how to deal with scope here, or how that solves the problem
11:29 < zipcpi> The semantic I want is in this bridi: http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/nalvaimenre
11:30 < akmnlrse> da'i sai: {re plise zo'u ko ri mi dunda} -> "there are two apples such that I want you to give them to me"
11:30 < akmnlrse> {ko zo'u ko re plise mi dunda} -> "give me two apples, doesn't matter which"
11:30 < zipcpi> How about {re lo mu plise}?
11:31 < zipcpi> Or zipcpibau: {rexe'e lo mu plise}
11:31 < zipcpi> {re nalvaimenre be lo mu plise}
11:31 < zipcpi> There is a set of five apples I care about
11:31 < zipcpi> But I don't care which two within the set
11:33 < akmnlrse> quantifying nalvaimenre outside of the inner bridi would seem to contradict itself
11:33 < akmnlrse> "there are two apples out of the five, that I don't care which ones they are, but still want you to give me exactly those two"
11:33 < zipcpi> I care about the number two
11:34 < zipcpi> It's why I made a UI instead of a gadri, because I think it makes the most sense attaching to numbers
11:35 <@xalbo> What does it do attached to things other than numbers (and, I guess, gadri)?
11:35 <@xalbo> .i tu gerku xa'a
11:35 <@xalbo> ?
11:35 < zipcpi> I think gerku xe'e is nonsense right now
11:36 < zipcpi> lo xe'e gerku, in my mind, is simply an unquantified "any dog"
11:36 < gleki> xe'e was initially a PA btw
11:36 < zipcpi> Ah
11:37 < zipcpi> ko'a xe'e , however, could mean {lo nalvaimenre be ko'a}
11:39 < zipcpi> da xe'e might be useful, ju'ocu'i
11:41  * nuzba @lojytan_bot: カタカナで表せないこともないって点が魅力的かもしれません(lojban) [http://bit.ly/1IOjgUx]
11:41  * nuzba @lojytan_bot: あ、教材リストのリンクを貼っておきます。    http://mw.lojban.org/papri/%E5%AD%A6%E7%BF%92        あと、ロジバン文法のPEG定義も貼っておきます。    http://subvert-the-dominant-paradigm.net/~jbominji/code/lojban_grammar.peg [http://bit.ly/1IOjFGq]
11:42 < zipcpi> There's also another potential problem. "Choose any number of apples"
11:42 < zipcpi> Where it is the *number* itself that is the subject of nalvaimenre
11:42 < gleki> use klani or its allegedly more precise synonyms
11:43 < zipcpi> But in the end you are choosing the apples, not the number
11:43 < zipcpi> It merely means I don't care about how many you choose
11:44 <@xalbo> Thinking about that, it seems like that {xo'e xe'e plise}, and {re xe'e plise} has the {xe'e} misplaced.
11:44 < zipcpi> Yes...
11:44 <@xalbo> {re lo xe'e plise} or something
11:44 < zipcpi> Maybe
11:45 < zipcpi> What about re lo mu plise though?
11:45 < zipcpi> Will we have to resort to lo xe'e me re lo mu plise?
11:46 < zipcpi> Sounds like perhaps it's a new PA
11:46 <@xalbo> {re lo xe'e mu plise} may work, if you're being picky about there being two apples from the five, but the choice of which ones is arbitrary
11:46 <@xalbo> I guess the real question is what does {xe'e} do in general?
11:46 < zipcpi> But I'm picky about the set of five
11:47 < zipcpi> We could call it {le mu plise} if that strengthens that intent better
11:48 < zipcpi> I'm picky about the set of five, I'm picky about the number two, but I'm not picky about which two as long as it comes from the set
11:49 < zipcpi> That's basically my intention with {xe'e}, to mark what distinctions I care about and what I don't
11:50 < zipcpi> Right now as I has prescribed it, {rexe'e} doesn't say "I don't care" to the number, but rather "I don't care" to how the quantification is implemented, when choosing members of the set
11:51 < zipcpi> THat makes saying "I don't care" to the *number* itself difficult though
11:55 < zipcpi> lo plise poi zilkancu da xe'e
11:55 <@xalbo> I think the problem is how you'd get a UI to do that. The "which ones" part isn't explicitly written anywhere where it's convenient to get a UI to attach to.
11:55 < zipcpi> lo plise poi zilkancu lo nalvaimenre be lo namcu
11:56 < zipcpi> Well, if you have any better ideas...
11:56 <@xalbo> Yeah, I'm not coming up with anything helpful.
12:01 < zipcpi> Hmm... {rone'e bi'i ro} might be what is desired here
12:02 < zipcpi> For "Choose any number of apples"
12:02 < zipcpi> Obviously here {rone'e} = {no}
12:07 < zipcpi> {su'o}?
12:08 < zipcpi> If "any number" is a PA, *xe'o
12:08 < zipcpi> It could also be useful as a digit
12:08 < zipcpi> lo nanca pe li renopaxe'o
12:12 < Ilmen> I recollect that {xo'e} is "any digit" when it's not alone on its own, but is among a digit string.
12:13 < zipcpi> But could it also mean "a specific contextually indicated number"?
12:13 < zipcpi> Essentially a le'elkai be lo ka namcu
12:13 < zipcpi> E.g. xo'epamumoi nanca
12:14 < Ilmen> It would be "some unspecified/obvious/unimportant digit", I think
12:14 < zipcpi> Hm
12:14 < Ilmen> paralleling zo'e/co'e/do'e and friends
12:15 < zipcpi> How about "Choose any number of apples" though?
12:16 < zipcpi> And of course, "Choose any number of these five apples"
12:16 < Ilmen> "ko cuxna lo su'o plise"
12:17 < zipcpi> ko cuxna su'o le meti me mu plise?
12:17 < zipcpi> For the latter
12:17 < ldlework> I always thought of xo'e as the zo'e of quantifiers. It is a quantifier, the speaker is just not saying which.
12:17 < zipcpi> Or le'i mu plise, jo'au gadganzu
12:17 < ldlework> xo'e allows for the listener to pick all or none of the apples
12:17 < ldlework> (or some, of course)
12:18 < ldlework> oh you guys just said that
12:18 < ldlework> u'u
12:18 < zipcpi> The problem here is quite similar to the problem of {le}, or how any of the -o'e things work. Does it mean "I have something I care about, but you should already know which by context"
12:18 < zipcpi> Or, "I really don't care"?
12:19 < ldlework> xorlo?
12:19 < zipcpi> Not sure what xorlo has got to do with the -o'e set
12:19 < ldlework> lo'e means something new in gg, right?
12:20 < zipcpi> Well except being defined based on zo'e, which we're still not sure what it means
12:20 < ldlework> oh, non-gadri -o'e things
12:20 < zipcpi> Actually I don't think {lo'e} differs much from actual usage, among the people who use them
12:20 < zipcpi> Oh yeah, {lo'e} is not part of the -o'e set
12:21 < ldlework> but anyway I think your suggested interpretation is right
12:21 < zipcpi> {lo'e} is, roughly, CLL {lo'e} and CLL {le'e} rammed together
12:21 < zipcpi> GG-{lo'e}
12:21 < zipcpi> Which people have already sort-of been doing in practice
12:22 < ldlework> veridical and non-veridical slammed together to create indefinite generalizations...
12:22 < ldlework> if you say so :)
12:22 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/comments.html?valsi=29129;definition=66765
12:22 < zipcpi> Not *exactly* veridicality-non-veridicality, but among the same vein
12:25 < ldlework> la jenca cu pu'i jukpa lo puktce ckafi
12:27 <@xalbo> Neither CLL-lo'e nor CLL-le'e had anything to do with veridicality, really.
12:27 < zipcpi> Well it did, in its explanation, tie it to lo'i and le'i
12:27 < zipcpi> The chosen forms was, at the very least, meant to be a mnemonic
12:28 <@xalbo> Yeah, there's a mnemonic there.
12:28 <@xalbo> I really think people read way more into veridicality than CLL ever intended. Almost all speech is verdical, it's nonveridicality that's unusual.
12:28 < Ilmen> « Does it mean "I have something I care about, but you should already know which by context" Or, "I really don't care"? » −− It's an ellipsis, so the speaker doesn't see a reason to bother expliciting its value/referent, probably because it's obvious or unimportant
12:28 < zipcpi> And it does suffer from a similar intentionality problem, as when one generalizes, it might be difficult to determine if a stereotype is involved
12:29 < ldlework> Ilmen: the important thing though is that there is a referent
12:30 < zipcpi> xalbo: That might be right. Perhaps it's just that worry about calling someone {le nanmu} when it really turns out "he" is a woman
12:31 < zipcpi> Or {lo nanmu}
12:32 < zipcpi> In the end though your intention is to describe what you thought was a man... that you erred there doesn't negate everything else
12:32 < ldlework> xalbo: I agree with that. I go further and say that non-veridicality is so unusual its typically obvious and demand a central lingusitic role.
12:32 < ldlework> and doesn't demand*
12:32 < ldlework> u'u
12:33 < Ilmen> zipcpi: depends on whether the speaker commit to the claim that X nanmu
12:33 < Ilmen> or if loka nanmu is used as some identification device, but is not asserted to be the case
12:33 < ldlework> referring descriptions only mean to identify the referrent
12:34 <@xalbo> In CLL, the point of {le nanmu} is to get the listener to the right referent. It doesn't claim that that referent fills nanmu1, it just claims that describing it that way is the most convenient way to convey the appropriate referent.
12:34 < ldlework> if the listener correctly picks out the right ambiguously man/woman, it is the predication that is asserted upon the referent that we care about whether its true or not
12:34 < Ilmen> So it's like nonce-la
12:34 <@xalbo> ldlework: Exactly.
12:36 <@xalbo> So if we're looking at two statues and {le nanmu le ninmu cu zmadu lo ni melbi}, then I'm talking about the statue of a man, and the fact that it doesn't actually nanmu is irrelevant.
12:36 < zipcpi> So then... what did xorlo do exactly? In the end it doesn't look like CLL-le differs from GG-le that much
12:36 < ldlework> the illocutionary act of reference is to identify, and the intended perlocutionary effect is for the listener to correctly make that identification. predication really happens after this designation of referential description.
12:36 <@xalbo> xorlo didn't change {le} at all, except for quantifiers
12:37 < ldlework> My favorite example of this is
12:37 < Ilmen> Otherwise it would have been called {xorle} ;-)
12:37 < ldlework> "You, get out!"
12:37 < ldlework> said to more than one person
12:37 < zipcpi> Except that now we have {ju'a cu'i} for when the speaker specifically wants to divorce themself from the description
12:37 <@xalbo> The thing that changed in xorlo is {lo}. In CLL, {lo} is verdical. Now that I've gone into what non-veridicality is, veridality is the opposite: what you say is what you mean.
12:37 < ldlework> No listener can decide whether to be effected by the perlocutionary imperative until the referent of the referring description is resolved.
12:38 <@xalbo> So {lo nanmu} is "a man". Not "something that really and truly honestly is a man, I've checked the chromosomes and everything", but "a man".
12:38 < zipcpi> lol
12:39 < ldlework> xalbo: yeah imagine two men dressed up as balerina and a lumberjack
12:39 < zipcpi> So, any man, some man, could be a specific man, could be a generalization about men...?
12:39 < ldlework> "I chose the man"
12:39 < ldlework> Likely identifies the lumberjack
12:39 < ldlework> taking classic gender roles into account I suppose :(
12:39 <@xalbo> zipcpi: That's the big difference with xorlo. In CLL, {lo nanmu} really does mean something very, very much like {su'o da poi nanmu}.
12:40 < zipcpi> Ah...
12:40 <@xalbo> So it's satisfied if there's any man such that...
12:40 <@xalbo> So never a specific man (or never mandatorily one)
12:40 < zipcpi> So in CLL, lo nanmu also asserts the "man-ness", rather than merely identifying a referent
12:40 < ldlework> Just like the default illocutionary act is assertive I think the default referential act is veridical, that's all
12:41 < zipcpi> Hm
12:41 < zipcpi> Oh
12:41 < zipcpi> I get it now
12:41 < zipcpi> "satisfied if there's any man such that..."
12:41 <@xalbo> zipcpi: Yes, because it doesn't have anything else to go on. It's never specific, so it's always just "anything such that it satisfies nanmu1". If you remove the veridicality, you end up with literally anything.
12:41  * zipcpi nods
12:41 < ldlework> but that's okay
12:42 < ldlework> because truth-valueness doesn't depend on whether the referents of descriptions actually satisfy the descripitons used to identify them
12:42 < ldlework> its whether the predication of the referents is true, which is the agenda of the speaker
12:43 < zipcpi> ldlework: I think, under CLL, {lo nanmu} is not to refer to a man, it's to say "There exists a man"
12:43 < zipcpi> Not refer to a specific man
12:44 <@xalbo> Of course, once you say "There exists a man" you have a referent to him, and you're probably making a statement about him, but yes.
12:44 < ldlework> xalbo: ie
12:44 < zipcpi> Yeah
12:44 < ldlework> I want to hazaard blaming it on taking the formalization of fopl statements too seriously.
12:45 < ldlework> Like when you see "There exists X such that"
12:45 < zipcpi> I suppose then, what xorlo did, was to say "Why do we need so many ways to represent {da}?"
12:45 < zipcpi> "Why is there no difference between {pa nanmu} and {pa lo nanmu}?"
12:45 < zipcpi> I mean {lo pa nanmu}
12:47 <@xalbo> What xorlo did is object to some of the consequences of {lo nanmu} meaning {su'o da poi nanmu}. The classic examples were {mi kalte lo pavyseljirna} and {mi nitcu lo mikce}.
12:48  * zipcpi nods
12:48 <@xalbo> In the former, I can hunt for unicorns without there being any unicorns in the world such that I hunt for them. In the latter, likewise.
12:48 < ldlework> I like the idea that da merely creates room for a referent, which you then relativize sufficiently to identify what fills the reference, and then a second illocutionary act takes place where the referents, not their descriptions undergo a process of being involved in a propositional act where they are related to each other of themselves via verbs or predicates
12:48 <@xalbo> There are doctors, but it's not the case that there's a doctor out there that I need. Rather, I need that there be a doctor.
12:48 < ldlework> Then, depending on the illuctionary force indicator (xu, etc) the proposition is used to perform some speech act
12:49 < ldlework> such as asserting, or asking questions, or denying, or promising
12:49 < zipcpi> xalbo: Yeah...
12:49 <@xalbo> ldlework: That sounds pretty exactly like CLL lojban.
12:50 < ldlework> xalbo: this doesn't assert that the referent that is eventually identified by way of the description is actually true of the description though
12:51 <@xalbo> CLL lo is {su'o da poi}. CLL le is {su'o da voi}.
12:51 < ldlework> since assertion is a specific illocutionary act that takes place after the propositional act, and the dependent references
12:51 <@xalbo> Sorry, {ro da voi}
12:51 < latro`a> that sounds like you more or less want a voi-cu
12:51 < zipcpi> Anyway, back to "any number", I was also thinking about MTG, where "any number of target creatures" is a common phrase, and includes zero. I suppose {su'o no} or {su'e ro} would work?
12:51 < ldlework> Sure, then its something like, the truth value of gadri-less expansions don't depend on relative clauses
12:51 < latro`a> I've suggested that and some related things before
12:52 < ldlework> Reference is an act of language.
12:52 < zipcpi> I'm thinking of entering {su'ero} just to gloss it as "any number"
12:52 < zipcpi> Cause I don't think it means anything else
12:52 < ldlework> I think that when expanding it out to existential forms that the logical entailment of the statemetns truth-value only consists of the predecation of referents in the larger propositional act.
12:53 < ldlework> Once you reach the propositional act, where you have referents and you are predicating them, the descriptions are no longer involved since they have served there purpose of identifying the referents.
12:53 < latro`a> the catch is that there really are no actual referents "in" a fully quantified statement. they're out there in the universe of discourse, but you can't safely instantiate them to re-use them in more sentences, partly because the existentially quantified ones might be functions of previously universally quantified ones
12:54 < latro`a> people struggle with this in mathematics constantly
12:54 < ldlework> The proposition deals with the referents and the predicates involved. Then, without any special illocutionary force identifer to change the defeault act from assertion, an assertion is made about the referents in terms of the predicate.
12:54 < ldlework> The problem is mistaking logical calculus for speech, I think.
12:55 < latro`a> as an example: {ro da poi mulna'u ku'o de mulna'u gi'e zmadu da}; {de} can never be instantiated
12:55 < ldlework> The logical calculus is there, but at a very specific part of the process of the speech act.
12:55 < latro`a> (sorry to be sorta talking over you, ldlework)
12:55 < ldlework> I argue it lies right at what Searle calls the propositional act.
12:55 < ldlework> Which comes after references are designated, but before the resulting proposition undergoes illocutionary force.
12:56 <@xalbo> zipcpi: I feel slightly more comfortable with {su'o no} than with {su'e ro}, because there are contexts where {ro} is ill-defined, but I don't think there are any where {no} isn't fine. Does that make sense?
12:56 < latro`a> "some number of sets which don't contain themselves"
12:56 < latro`a> :p
12:56 < zipcpi> On the other hand though, {no} isn't necessarily the smallest number
12:56 < latro`a> (sorry)
12:56 < zipcpi> In some contexts, negative numbers make sense
12:56 <@xalbo> zipcpi: Good point.
12:57 < zipcpi> That's even why I entered {no'ai} and {no'e'u}; because when working on {xokauva'e} scales, I realized that zero could mean two very different things depending on the scale used
12:59 < latro`a> incidentally, I have thought about actually talking in lojban in a framework like you're saying, ldlework
12:59 < ldlework> When you want to consider the truth value of a statement, it is enough to know whether the surface assertion is true of the referents of descriptions. The question and interrogation of whether intended referents are true of their descriptions only has value in the resolution of unsuccessful perlocutionary designation.
13:00 < latro`a> where I have a bunch of sentences that don't actually say anything, but merely define the relevant objects and give them shorthand symbols, and then we actually talk about them
13:00 < latro`a> it's like declarative programming
13:00 < zipcpi> ua
13:00 < ldlework> latro`a: I like that metaphor
13:00 < ldlework> I used it last night on zipcpi
13:02 < ldlework> I think that this observation has a lot of effects on what we're actually trying to do when we expand lojbanic statements to more existentially logical forms
13:03 < ldlework> Sometimes I think we get distracted by our referring descriptions when we probably usually really want to understand the surface assertion or at least proposition
13:03 <@xalbo> ldlework: I think that's taking things too far. Are you saying that "I'm eating an apple" isn't a statement about whether or not you're eating an apple, but rather "an apple" is just trying to get some referent (doesn't matter what), and then you're asserting that you're eating that?
13:03 < ldlework> xalbo: very much like the default illocutionary force is assertive, the default referential one is veridical
13:03 < zipcpi> What about post-xorlo {mi citka lo plise} then, xalbo?
13:03 < ldlework> xalbo: in english say it with some inflection
13:03 < ldlework> I'm eating "an apple"
13:03 < ldlework> I'm eating an _apple_
13:03 < ldlework> etc etc
13:04 < zipcpi> JVS isn't cooperating
13:04 < latro`a> I always came back to the same basic problem: to go from referential to existential, you have to explicitly label the domain
13:04 < zipcpi> Guess it really doesn't like {su'ero}
13:04 < ldlework> if you say "mi citka lo plise" without strange context, or any other force indication, I must understand that you are indeed really eating an apple
13:05 < latro`a> sorry, to go from referential to existential while preserving all meaning
13:05 < zipcpi> Well I'm trying to stretch existing cmavo to avoid inventing a new one; but if too many people object I might have to
13:06 < ldlework> communication is a dance of illocutionary desire and perlocutionary effects
13:06 < ldlework> words don't really have inherent meaning
13:06 < ldlework> by the fact we can perform utterance acts without actually meaning or saying anything
13:07 < ldlework> all of this gets in the way of just wanting to consider the logical entailment of some lojban statements
13:08 < ldlework> I think when you're doing logical proofs and such, you just work with the assumption that everything involved is veridical
13:09 < ldlework> Since it literally makes no sense for any logician to ever work with non-veridicality in in their work
13:09 < ldlework> But then its just an awkward thing when you try to analyze actual speech this way
13:10 < ldlework> And further to say to tell people that when they use the language they have undue logical consequences
13:11 < ldlework> Because of constraints that really only apply utility in a specific domain of analytics
13:26 < zipcpi> Ugh... having trouble accessing JVS and LMW right now
13:29 < durka42> maybe you've been rate-limited :p
13:30 < ldlework> u'i
13:32 < zipcpi> Error: You have used up all your cmavo space allocated for... forever
13:32 < zipcpi> To buy more cmavo space, send a trillion dollars to Robert LeChavelier. Thank you
13:34 < zipcpi> btw wrt-to "wrong hyphens", would you feel a bit better if it was -l-, since -l- can never be a hyphen
13:35 < zipcpi> ci'onmau could still be a problem though :p
13:35 < durka42> yeah but I love {ci'onme'a} so no big :)
13:35 < zipcpi> :p
13:43 < zipcpi> What might be nice wrt typographical conventions though, if there was some method of unambiguously shortening e.g. bypyfyky into BPFK
13:43 < zipcpi> Some people use capital letters, but that's ambiguous with the use of capital latters for syllabic stress or cmevla
13:44 < durka42> if you use capital letters for lerfu, then you'd better use accent marks for stress :)
13:44 < zipcpi> ie
13:44 < durka42> however, it should be able to disambiguate them, anyway
13:44 < durka42> you never stress a single-syllable cmavo
13:44 < durka42> so any word with all the letters uppercase is a lerfu string
13:45 < durka42> whereas a word with just one uppercase letter is a stress marker
13:45 < zipcpi> Actually I often do in actual speech... logalraiKENkaBElofraGAri
13:45 < durka42> s/just one/just some
13:45 < fenki> durka42 meant to say: whereas a word with just some uppercase letter is a stress marker
13:45 < durka42> s/letter/letters
13:45 < fenki> durka42 meant to say: whereas a word with just some uppercase letters is a stress marker
13:45 < zipcpi> Ah.
13:46 < latro`a> I'm actually not sure how to split that, zipcpi
13:46 < durka42> I mean what you said can't be an abbreviation/lerfu string
13:46 < zipcpi> exp: logalraiKENkaBElofraGAri
13:46 < mensi> ([lo {galraikenka <be (¹lo fragari KU¹) BEhO>} KU] VAU)
13:46 < durka42> why did you stress the BE
13:46 < latro`a> why stress the be
13:46 < durka42> I guess it's allowed
13:46 < latro`a> yeah
13:46 < latro`a> that confused me
13:46 < zipcpi> Just my speech style
13:46 < latro`a> because I expected the next word to be a brivla
13:46 < latro`a> but then it would have to fragment
13:47 < durka42> oh you were objecting to me saying nobody stresses single-syllable cmavo
13:47 < durka42> yeah so then, use accent marks :)
13:47 < latro`a> oh, I see
13:47 < latro`a> that's...weird
13:47 < latro`a> that's like stressing "of" in english
13:47 < zipcpi> lol
13:47 < durka42> co'o
13:47 < ctefa`o> en: ju'ei
13:47 < mensi> ju'ei = [JUhEI] Tight scope bridi separator; analogous to .i without  ending the abstractor or relative clause. |>>> "nu
13:47 < mensi> broda ju'ei brode" is equivalent to "nu ju'e gi broda gi brode". Similarly "ko'a noi broda ju'ei brode" is equivalent to
13:47 < mensi> "ko'a noi ju'e gi broda gi brode". |>>> latros
13:47 < zipcpi> ctefa'o: I thought ju'ei could be replaced by jeNOI, but it can't within NU
13:48 < zipcpi> Without ju'ei I had to resort to {kei jo'u LE NU}, which is... yuck
13:51 < zipcpi> latro'a: lol maybe it's weird... I was actually thinking it more like some kind of silly TV advert
13:51 < zipcpi> logalraiKENka!  BElofraGAri!
13:53 < zipcpi> I kindof-randomly stress cmavo; I do have to be careful though because I hear if you stress them before a brivla you need a mandatory pause
13:54 < zipcpi> LO.jboBANgu vs LOjbo BANgu
13:54 <@xalbo> If you stress the syllable before a brivla that has su'oci syllables, then yes, it breaks differently.
13:54  * zipcpi nods
14:04 < Donald_ET3> no lojban.org
14:04 < zipcpi> ie
14:05 < Amnadya> ür
14:05 < zipcpi> ro da pe la'o u lojban.org u cu spofu
14:09 < zipcpi> All spoffed up
14:09 < Donald_ET3> auuu :(
14:09 < Donald_ET3> I want to learn lojban.
14:10 < Donald_ET3> I only got as far as learning the pronounciation.
14:10 < zipcpi> Huh funnily this works: http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/index.html
14:10 < Ilmen> Isn't it because it uses your local cache?
14:10 < zipcpi> Maybe
14:11 < zipcpi> I have no idea how sutysisku works :p
14:11 < Ilmen> Donald_ET3: You can also learn Lojban here, on IRC; there's a #ckule (school) channel for beginners
14:12 < zipcpi> This is about the point where I would link you to the Crash Course and the Wave lessons but they're both on the wiki
14:13 < zipcpi> Which is currently spoffing up
14:14 < Ilmen> Donald_ET3: Unfortunately it's pretty frequent that the main site gets down, until some admin restarts it
14:14 < Donald_ET3> Oh. Okay.
14:15 < Ilmen> Maybe you should consider saving the Crash Course or the Wave Lessons when possible on your disk, so that you can read them offline
14:16 < Ilmen> en: coi
14:16 < mensi> coi = [COI] vocative: greetings/hello. |>>> officialdata
14:16 < zipcpi> Crash course is being updated constantly though
14:16 < Ilmen> at least the dictionary bot is responding
14:16 < Donald_ET3> okay
14:16 < zipcpi> Oh yeah here's your first word for today:
14:16 < zipcpi> en: spofu
14:16 < mensi> spofu = x1 is broken/inoperable/broken down/non-utile/not usable for function x2. |>>> Agentive break, cause to become
14:16 < mensi> inoperable (= pofygau, pofyzu'e); accidentally break, as a result of an event, non-agentive (= pofyja'e, nutpo'uja'e).
14:16 < mensi> See also daspo, katna, porpi, se xrani, cikre. |>>> officialdata
14:16 < menli> lol
14:19 < zipcpi> "spoff" is an English slang term I invented based on {spofu} :p
14:26 < ldlework> people at Docker are saying "krillin it"
14:26 < ldlework> its unbearable
14:26 < ldlework> zo'o
14:30 < zipcpi> ta'o How about sumdza for "object" in the sense of object-oriented-programming, or any object that can go into a sumti?
14:31 < zipcpi> Cause dacti means physical object
14:47 < ctefaho> skami dacti
14:47 < ctefaho> dun
14:48 < ctefaho> skami zei dacti
14:48 < ctefaho> skami zau dacti
14:48 < ctefaho> skami'ydacti
14:48 < ctefaho> all beautiful
14:49 < zipcpi> No... I said that it also works for any object that goes into a sumti
14:50 < ctefaho> SKACTI
14:50 < zipcpi> That's a lujvo
14:50 < zipcpi> I think skari citka
14:50 <@xalbo> {skacti} is a lujvo, {skari zei citka}, colored-eat
14:51 < ctefaho> THAT'S RIGHT
14:51 < ctefaho> beware of the color monster
14:51  * ctefaho out
14:51 < zipcpi> Sorry, we're not implementing selpa'is free-lujvo yet
14:51 < ctefaho> I have an alternative to merging zi'evla and lujvo
14:51 < ctefaho> so you can compete with disliking sepla's or my idea
14:52  * ctefaho out2
14:52 <@xalbo> I do think something based on {sumti} is pretty good for an "object" in the OO sense.
14:57 < zipcpi> The BSFK has no objections to zi'ejvo per-se (though I can see the argument about obscuring etymology, especially for reljvo with common rafsi; after all, I recognized those rafsi without being anywhere near rolrafcre), but the BSFK doesn't decide what gets to be entered into JVS
14:58 < zipcpi> If I actually tried to enter a zi'ejvo in there I'd be downvoted right away
14:59 < zipcpi> So nope, too much too quickly
14:59 < Ilmen> co'o ro do
14:59 < zipcpi> co'o
15:08 < zipcpi> Maybe sumti zei dacti is usable, but I'm not sure how many people like an invisible -pev- or -zam- attached to the tertau of the veljvo
15:09 < em> do you capitalize the word lojban?
15:09 < em> when referencing it?
15:09 < zipcpi> In English, yes, in Lojban, no, although in Lojban we often use {lo jbobau}
15:09 < ldlework> or la lojban
15:10 < zipcpi> Yeah
15:10 < em> so if im talking about Lojban in English then I capitalize it?
15:10 < zipcpi> Yep
15:10 < zipcpi> English treats names of languages as proper nouns and we see no reason to try to break that tradition there
15:12 < zipcpi> I hear in French it is different?
15:12 < zipcpi> Not sure
15:15 < zipcpi> rafsi: dacti
15:15 < mensi> zo'oi dai .e zo'oi dact rafsi zo dacti
15:15 < zipcpi> sumdai seems nice except for that nitpick I mentioned
15:15 < zipcpi> I could just enter it and brace for downvotes
15:16 < ctef> you can capitalize it if you use other methods than capital letters to indicate stress, em
15:17 < ctef> la .Lòjban.
15:17 < ctefaho> obligatory no standard ortography reminder
15:17  * ctefaho out3
15:20 < zipcpi> k: broda'abucudu'efuguxe'ijukulumunu'opukerusutu'uvuvexujezu
15:20 < mensi> (CU [Z:broda'abucudu'efuguxe'ijukulumunu'opukerusutu'uvuvexujezu VAU])
15:23 < zipcpi> Or make {zamne} a gismu for "jargon" lol
15:24 < zipcpi> Then all zi'evla with zamn- is assignable
15:25 < zipcpi> Another solution; {cei} to cmevla, but relies on BCM
15:28 < zipcpi> k: brody'a
15:28 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "b" found.
15:28 < zipcpi> That's too zbusufukai right now li'a
15:33 < zipcpi> k: zamy'itloku
15:33 < mensi> (CU [L:zamy'itloku VAU])
15:36 < zipcpi> Still spoffed. Think we need to tell Robin
15:38 < zipcpi> But yeah cmevla would have the advantages of being nice and short like lerfu-sumti. ki'ogra cei .kygys. - though those pauses are a bummer
15:50 < ldlework> doi ro do ju'i .i mi nitcu lo nu jungau lo vajni
15:51 < ldlework> .i mi te benji di'e poi nuzba .i lo mi desku ladri cu mukti lo nu ro le nanmu cu zvati le bimselsru
15:51 < ldlework> mu'o
15:52 < ldlework> di'a pu co'e
15:58  * nuzba @Pontama314: 日本語話者でlojbanを話題してる人が、そこそこいるな。    so'o ponpre cu tavla la lojban ui [http://bit.ly/1T7B18u]
16:22 < ctefaho> does anyone here practice jbobau handwriting?
16:23 < dutchie> i did, when i was working through the lessons
16:23 < dutchie> did all the exercises longhand
16:25 < ctefaho> longhand?
16:25  * ctefaho has learnt a new word today
16:27 < ctefaho> also learnt that the schwa doesn't seem to ever have ´ or `
16:28 < dutchie> why do you ask about handwriting lojban?
16:28 < ctefaho> was just curious. am starting to practice it myself
16:30 < ctefaho> just wrote down what I call "unicode lojban" (` for stress, ŭ and ị)
16:30 < ctefaho> no keyboard restrictions with handwriting:)
16:31 < ctefaho> heh it feels way different writing it by hand for some reason
16:38 < ctefaho> almost like a real language zo'o
16:40  * nuzba @bgcarlisle: Short story prompt for Lojbanists: la cizra mensi http://www.bgcarlisle.com/blog/2015/07/01/short-story-prompt-for-lojban-enthusiasts-la-cizra-mensi/ #lojban [http://bit.ly/1GOPM8D]
16:44 < bigcentaur> hey what happened to mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/camxes-exp.html ?
16:44 < ctefaho> whole lojban.org seems to have catched fire
16:44 < bigcentaur> ahhh
16:44 < bigcentaur> blast ha
16:44 < ctefaho> cll I can access at least
16:45 < ctefaho> oh god the macro expansions get so much easier when you can draw the whole thing
16:47 < ctefaho> why have i never tried this before
17:01 < zipcpi> ldlework: Wow I don't know how we're going to translate this. The little I read from Amazon's preview talks a lot about the meanings of specific English words, as well as English metalinguistic concepts like "noun"
17:02 < zipcpi> It would... basically need a rewrite if we're going to talk about similar Lojbanic concepts
17:02 < ldlework> zipcpi: I don't know why you think lojbanists cannot talk about 'nouns' in the wider linguistic sense
17:02 < zipcpi> ldlework: We "can", but he refers to specific English words
17:03 < ldlework> Noun isn't an idea specific to english though.
17:03 < zipcpi> Yes, but it'd be very hard to choose comparable words
17:03 < ldlework> "Noun" is the english word for the idea for which the word rperesents.
17:03 < ldlework> We have a word for that too
17:03 < zipcpi> Like there's the part that talks about the word "witch" for example, which relies on the history of the usage of the word "witch"
17:04 < zipcpi> Lojban doesn't have a comparable word
17:05 < ldlework> sumti is the comparable word
17:05 < zipcpi> We'd essentially have to rewrite those parts in Searle's place, and I'm not up for that there.
17:05 < zipcpi> No, not the word "noun" per se
17:05 < zipcpi> But the specific words he considers nouns
17:05 < ldlework> Also there's nothing wrong with quoting english words when talking about them
17:05 < zipcpi> Theoretically, yes, but is this book supposed to be about English?
17:06 < ldlework> There's a difference between being written in a language and talking about specific words in a language.
17:06 < ctefaho> coho
17:06 < ldlework> When he uses the word noun, he's merely accessing the semantic which exists behind the english word noun.
17:06 < zipcpi> Yes, but that basically means that this translation can only be understood by English speakers, who understand the history behind the English word "witch"
17:07 < ldlework> zipcpi: Which is probably fine since it is a book about linguistics.
17:07 < ldlework> And language philosophy.
17:07 < ldlework> I mean there has to be a way to translate such works.
17:08 < zipcpi> If we're going to translate it in such a way that it can only be understood by English speakers, what's the point of it being in not-English?
17:08 < ldlework> We can even just subtext right in the discourse what the quoted english word means
17:08 < ldlework> In lojban
17:09 < ldlework> (to du zo termafyfe'i toi)
17:09 < zipcpi> The problem is that he doesn't just rely on denotation, but connotation
17:09 < ldlework> Which we can subtext.
17:10 < zipcpi> I don't know how to describe all the nuances of connotation in Lojban
17:10 < ldlework> Specific connotations?
17:10 < ldlework> Not the premise of connotation itself.
17:10 < ldlework> Don't exaggerate the task :)
17:11 < ldlework> zipcpi: in any case reading the book will be value on its own even if we don't translate it
17:11 < zipcpi> je'e
17:11 < ldlework> but it should standout as worrying that we can't translate an arbitrary work
17:11 < zipcpi> It's difficult to translate these sorts of texts into *any* language, not just Lojban
17:12 < zipcpi> I'm sure there are translators much more certu than me, but...
17:13 < zipcpi> But even say... French; I'm sure they have lots of words with a similar connotational history to "witch"; heck it might even be their same word
17:13 < zipcpi> Lojban, being a constructed language that isn't even a century old, doesn't have that
17:13 < ldlework> I think it comes down to convention
17:13 < ldlework> That's all
17:14 < ldlework> Got a problem? Come up with a convention to give the reader the missing context or information
17:14 < ldlework> subtext, footnotes, etc
17:14 < zipcpi> Problem is that I don't know what the missing information is myself. Connotation is a very... bellyfeel thing
17:15 < ldlework> I am considering writing an essay that frames lojban upon the thinking in this book and can therefore just write the information in the way that's most natural
17:16 < ldlework> Giving a sizable background on that thinking before delving into its consequences for lojban
17:17 < ldlework> zipcpi: so did you get it?
17:18 < zipcpi> Not yet; just reading through the preview
17:19 < ldlework> how long is it?
17:19 < zipcpi> It ends a bit past 1.4 "Why study speech acts?"
17:19 < ldlework> ah
17:20 < ldlework> zipcpi: also there's fu'ivla right?
17:20 < ldlework> and zi'evla
17:20 < ldlework> doesn't solve the problem entirely
17:24 < zipcpi> Yes, I have that idea for things like illocutionary act -> itloku nunzu'e, without bothering over exactly what itloku means, but for importing the connotational history of "witch", it doesn't quite work
17:25 < ldlework> There's gotta be a way to talk about another language's synonyms, homonyms and so on from a lanaguage other than that language.
17:25 < zipcpi> Like I said, it is possible if we want this translation to be about English
17:26 < zipcpi> Not so much if we want it to be a general reference about language philosophy
17:26 < ldlework> Well I think the examples being english isn't a problem really
17:26 < ldlework> Specially if you want to talk about linguistic effects that lojban makes impossible
17:27 < zipcpi> Hm
17:27 < ldlework> I do think it may potentially be more worth while to write our own book
17:27 < ldlework> :)
17:27 < ldlework> That summarized the content of this book and frames it with regard to the details of our langauge.
17:28 < ldlework> But we can wait to see if you see the same value in its content that I do
17:28 < zipcpi> selzu'e, not nunzu'e
17:29 < _mukti_> coi jbopre
17:29 < ldlework> coi
17:29 < zipcpi> ... who defined {selpre} even though {prenu} isn't defined with an x2? lol
17:30 < _mukti_> .u'i
17:30 < _mukti_> Not a jvajvo, apparently
17:31 < zipcpi> ue da poi jbopre cu zbusufukai semau mi iau xo'oru'e
17:31 < _mukti_> .u'i
17:32 < _mukti_> ua la tijlan cu finti
17:32 < _mukti_> .i mi se spaji
17:33 < zipcpi> ta'i ma do djunybi'o .i la jbovlaste ca spofu
17:34 < ldlework> la jbovlaste po'o nai cu jbovlaste
17:35 < zipcpi> ku'i la sutysisku na arco lo finti
17:36 < zipcpi> en: selpre
17:36 < mensi> selpre [< se prenu ≈ 2nd conversion people] = p2 is the personality/persona exhibited by p1. |>>> x2 can be other than a
17:36 < mensi> human. Cf. seltra, selzu'e. |>>> tijlan
17:40 < _mukti_> vlaste: selpre (finti)
17:40 < vlaste> selpre (finti) = tijlan
17:46 < zipcpi> rafsi: zo'e
17:46 < mensi> y no da se tolcri
17:46 < zipcpi> Why can't zo'e have a rafsi... lol
17:48 < zipcpi> What are the status of co'e-lujvo anyway? Do any exist?
17:48 < zipcpi> Well, {comco'e} lol
17:48 < zipcpi> x1 is a thingamajig / thing which the speaker can't put a predicate upon
17:50 < zipcpi> Still thinking about "object" as in "physicality unspecified; any object that can be the subject of a noun/sumti, or "object" in object-oriented-programming
17:50 < zipcpi> Candidates I have right now are {sumdza}, {sumdai}, and {sumco'e}
17:51 < zipcpi> Which would be best?
17:54 < zipcpi> I like the sound of {sumdai} the best, though that somewhat abuses the tertau
17:55 < zipcpi> And I don't know what JVS users tend to think of that
17:56 < _mukti_> xu do co'e fo do
17:56 < _mukti_> si da
17:56 < zipcpi> .y. ki'a
17:58 < _mukti_> si'au da ve co'e .i mi te preti fi do gasnu lo nu go'i
17:58 < _mukti_> (fi lo du'u)
18:16  * nuzba @464161niftg: @Pontama314 .ui do facki lo du'u go'i zo'e fi la lojban kei .uadai .u'adai [http://bit.ly/1CLhe5h]
18:16  * nuzba @464161niftg: zo'o su'o do ka'e cilre la lojban la lojban .i si'a zo'o su'o do ka'e tavla la lojban la lojban [http://bit.ly/1f38pyU]
18:20  * nuzba @464161niftg: ji'a sai su'o do ka'e cilre la lojban la lojban la lojban la lojban gi'e ka'e tavla la lojban la lojban la lojban vau vau zo'o .i baljbo sai [http://bit.ly/1CLhKjU]
18:41 < zipcpi> Anyone home?
18:42 < noncomcinse> cipra
18:42 < zipcpi> coi
18:42 < noncomcinse> .i lonu cipra cu noroi snada
18:42 < noncomcinse> coi la zipcpi
18:43 < noncomcinse> .i lodu'u go'oi cipra na jetnu
18:43 < noncomcinse> .i lonu cipra cu ro roi snada va'o lonu cilre
18:43 < noncomcinse> doi la zipcpi do mo
18:49 < zipcpi> milxe lo ka badri le nu la jbovlaste je la lobyuitki na akti
18:49 < zipcpi> mi simsa lo'e vinta iau u'ise'i
18:50 < noncomcinse> jbo: akti
18:50 < mensi> akti = x1 ca'a zilpilno x2 |>>> ko catlu fe ji'a zo pilno |>>> gleki
18:50 < zipcpi> tolspofu
18:50 < zipcpi> va'i jy je ly spofu
18:50 < noncomcinse> je'e
18:51 < noncomcinse> .y. le lojbo cu tolspofu ua
18:51 < noncomcinse> en: iau
18:51 < mensi> 7 da se tolcri: mlatrmiau, mriiaucmo, bantumu'u, bankubu'i, banpunu'a, jvisuai, jdikyplini
18:51 < zipcpi> i'au
18:52 < zipcpi> en: i'au
18:52 < mensi> i'au = [IhAU] reset bridi-level to zero |>>> Auto-inserts all necessary terminators to reset to the top-level bridi of
18:52 < mensi> the sentence (i.e. everything that i would insert except the last vau). May be used with xoi. May also be used with
18:52 < mensi> UI-cmavo; UI-cmavo placed immediately after would apply to the entire sentence; see ji'au, fu'e, fu'o. |>>>
18:52 < mensi> spheniscine
18:52 < phma> coi
18:52 < zipcpi> ki'u lo nu mi cafne co pilno zo i'au kei mi nalcatni snigau zo iau
18:52 < noncomcinse> zo .i'au cu panra lu cu'au xi da'a li'u .i ku'i zo cu'au cu spogau
18:53 < noncomcinse> sa .i zo xi spogau tu'a zo cu'au
18:53 < zipcpi> u'i
18:53 < noncomcinse> en: cu'au
18:53 < mensi> cu'au = universial famyma'o: terminates the most recently opened construct or clause. |>>> cu'au looks back for the most
18:53 < mensi> recently opened construct that has not been terminated, and emulates whatever famyma'o would terminate it. It can also
18:53 < mensi> be subscripted with xi, and will terminate that many times. Note that that means grammatical function is being put in a
18:53 < mensi> xi clause, so be careful when using it. Additionally, cu'au xi ro will terminate all the way up to the last
18:53 < mensi> sentence-starting word (.i mi klama lo zarci pe lo pendo be mi cu'au xi ro -> .i mi klama lo zarci pe lo pendo be mi
18:53 < mensi> cu'au-be'o-ku-ge'u-ku-vau). This will also terminate to sentences started in lu (will NOT emulate li'u UNLESS used
18:53 < mensi> multiple...
18:53 < mensi> [mo'u se katna] http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/cu'au
18:53 < noncomcinse> coi la'oi .phma.
18:53 < zipcpi> More like cu'au xi da'a, but works like cu'au xi ro for attitudinals
18:55 < noncomcinse> xu zo .i'au zo'u lo zbasu cu pensi zo .i joi zo vau .i'au vau pe'i
18:55 < noncomcinse> exp: .i mi klama lonu zgike .i'au ui
18:55 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [oO] or [yY] but "i" found.
18:55 < noncomcinse> .i lu co'e .i'au .i'au .i'au  .i'au .i'au .i'au li'u gendra
18:56 < zipcpi> na ca'a se sanji da poi gentufa
18:57 < noncomcinse> .i ku'i lo su'o re me zo .i'au na jai se nitcu
18:57 < zipcpi> ja'a go'oi zbasu
18:57 < phma> coi la noncomcinse .i mo
18:57 < noncomcinse> pensi lo cizra valsi gi'e ke cizra je se cizra ke'e be su'oda
18:58 < noncomcinse> gi'e troci lonu cuxna fi lo me'oi .musicplayerdaemon. samselpla
18:59 < zipcpi> .ije mi sarji sai lo du'u zo i'au cu inda lo ka binxo lo pamei slaka cmavo
19:01 < zipcpi> ki'u lo nu zifre lo nu na pensi lo gerna stura ja lo du'u lo xokau famyma'o cu jai sarcu
19:02 < noncomcinse> je'e nai la zipcpi
19:02 < zipcpi> ma na se jimpe
19:03 < noncomcinse> lodu'u go'oi slaka
19:03 < noncomcinse> cu cfipa
19:03 < zipcpi> zo iau
19:03 < _mukti_> Web site still ailing I see.
19:04 < zipcpi> ja zo go pebau la tcekitaujau
19:04 < zipcpi> mi nalcatni snigau zo iau
19:05 < noncomcinse> je'e la zipcpi
19:06 < phma> inda ki'a .i la jbovlaste cu si'au spofu
19:06 < zipcpi> en: inda
19:06 < mensi> inda = x1 deserves / merits / is worthy of x2 (property of x1) |>>> See also jerna. |>>>
19:06 < mensi> Ilmen
19:06 < zipcpi> ja'aku jyvysy spofu
19:06 < _mukti_> ie
19:06 < _mukti_> za'a
19:07 < _mukti_> lo selfu skamu cu na frati
19:07 < noncomcinse> camxes: tu'a ko'a .e tu'a ko'e
19:07 < camxes> ([tu'a {ko'a <e (¹tu'a ko'e LUhU¹)>} LUhU] VAU)
19:07 < _mukti_> s/skamu/skami/
19:07 < fenki> _mukti_ meant to say: lo selfu skami cu na frati
19:07 < noncomcinse> TIL {tu'a} has a terminator.
19:08 < noncomcinse> noroi djuno pu
19:08 < zipcpi> zo lu'u famyma'o ma'oi LAhE
19:09 < noncomcinse> .i pau da'i ganai   me lo'u ma'oi COI broda le'u   gi mi ko'oi sruma     tu'a zo lo lu'u   ba'e ji   tu'a zo la lu'u
19:11 < noncomcinse> (sei lo'u ma'oi COI broda le'u   lo'u ma'oi COI  ba'e lo  broda le'u se'u)
19:11 < zipcpi> pe'i le gadri poi se claxu cu ambigu
19:14 < zipcpi> lu <coi selpa'i> li'u cu binxo lu <coi le selpa'i> li'u ja lu <coi la selpa'i> li'u
19:14 < noncomcinse> .i mi djica tu'a zo la   fi'o te jinvi: lonu lakne fa lonu lo broda ka'e me la broda
19:15 < zipcpi> jdima pe'a lo nu vimcu le gadri
19:15 < noncomcinse> lu zo'e ze'ei lo li'u co'e xu
19:16 < zipcpi> je'u do'a
19:16 < noncomcinse> camxes: je'u
19:16 < camxes> je'u
19:16 < noncomcinse> .i mi fliba tcidu zo do'u
19:16 < zipcpi> zo do'a
19:16 < noncomcinse> .i mi ba co'arsanji
19:17 < noncomcinse> 21:14 < noncomcinse> .i mi djica tu'a zo la   fi'o te jinvi: lonu lakne fa lonu lo broda ka'e me la broda
19:18 < noncomcinse> .i di'u srera
19:18 < noncomcinse> .i mi na djuno lodu'u makau tadji lo mi skami .i'au vau li'a
19:19 < zipcpi> u'i
19:58 < zipcpi> Thinking of new slate of zi'evla
20:00 < zipcpi> ki'orbi me'orbi gi'orbi te'orbi pe'orbi xe'orbi ze'orbi go'orbi
20:00 < zipcpi> Binary prefixes
20:01 < zipcpi> Rafsi -ki'orb(y)- etc
20:02 < zipcpi> Gleki has proposed bitsi for bit, and bivbitsi for bype
20:02 < zipcpi> So ki'orbybivbitsi = kibibyte / binary kilobyte. Hm... a bit long though
20:04 < zipcpi> vlaste: bivbi (gimka)
20:04 < vlaste> zo bivbi gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo bivbi gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
20:04 < zipcpi> vlaste: bitsi (gimka)
20:04 < vlaste> zo bitsi gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo bitsi gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
20:13 < zipcpi> exp: broda cei me'au by
20:13 < mensi> (CU [broda {cei <me'au (¹by BOI¹) MEhU>}] VAU)
20:13 < zipcpi> broda cei citka be lo mlatu
20:14 < zipcpi> brode cei plipe be lo mumplini
20:16 < zipcpi> Wait, which way does cei/goi go? o.o
20:16 < zipcpi> durka, which way does cei/goi go? o.o
20:17 < zipcpi> I think it's ambiguous
20:17 < zipcpi> The sky is falliiiiing
20:17 < zipcpi> Call the logic police
20:18 < durka42> what do you mean?
20:18 < zipcpi> ko'a goi la .alis. ; la .alis. goi ko'a
20:19 < zipcpi> mlatu cei murmura ; murmura cei mlatu
20:19 < zipcpi> Help
20:20 < durka42> well, it's whichever side the variable is on
20:21 < durka42> the only question is what happens when a variable is on both sides
20:21 < zipcpi> What about ko'a goi ko'e then?
20:21 < durka42> right
20:21 < zipcpi> Also I dunno, I can see using nonce-names as variables
20:21 < durka42> don't know off the top of my head
20:21 < durka42> LMW is down again or I would check what the BPFK has to say
20:21 < zipcpi> ... probably will need a new UI T.T
20:22 < durka42> there might be one already
20:22 < noncomcinse> cei/goi?
20:23 < noncomcinse> I assume {X cei/goi Y} implies Y=return(x)
20:23  * zipcpi searches for cei and goi on sutysisku... couldn't find any weird cmavo that indicates direction
20:23 < durka42> noncomcinse: what?
20:23 < durka42> zipcpi: just stick a {ca'e} to whichever one you're assigning
20:24 < noncomcinse> en: bu'a
20:24 < mensi> bu'a = [GOhA] logically quantified predicate variable: some selbri 1. |>>> officialdata
20:24 < noncomcinse> bu'a cei broda
20:24 < zipcpi> I have no idea what those are
20:24 < noncomcinse> en: ca'e
20:24 < mensi> ca'e = [UI2] evidential: I define. |>>> See also mitcu'a, mitsmu. |>>> officialdata
20:24 < durka42> {bu'a} are supposed to be like {da} for brivla
20:24 < durka42> but they did not catch on at all
20:24 < zipcpi> lol
20:25 < noncomcinse> Isn't {lo} formalized as {zo'e poi ke'a}?
20:25 < durka42> usually noi, but yeah
20:25 < noncomcinse> So ultimately, lo bu'a =/= da
20:25 < noncomcinse> Kinda?
20:26 < durka42> it's more like {bu'a} is supposed to abstract over relations
20:26 < noncomcinse> kindysorta
20:26 < noncomcinse> uanai
20:26 < durka42> the same way {da} abstracts over sumti
20:26 < durka42> abstracts is the wrong word
20:26 < zipcpi> durka42: {ca'egoi} vs {goica'e}?
20:26 < zipcpi> Or {goi ko'a ca'e}
20:26 < durka42> zipcpi: ko'aca'e goi ko'e vs ko'a goi ko'eca'e
20:27 < zipcpi> Seems cromulent, but I don't know what it'd do for potential expansions of UI. It's probably already a mess :p
20:27 < durka42> I mean do we even have an expansion for {goi}
20:28 < zipcpi> Good point lol
20:28 < noncomcinse> IMO, UI should be able to be placed anywhere without affecting ANY other cmavo grammatically.
20:29 < noncomcinse> (ta'o, whenever I look at a sentence with only cmavo, it's just... mibnardjuno)
20:29 < zipcpi> Not quite so simple... there's always those weird exceptions like {zo} and {zei} :p
20:29 < noncomcinse> zo VALSI = one word
20:29 < durka42> I mean, say {ko'a goi ko'e} expands to {mi goirgau ko'a ko'e}, then if we stick a {ca'e} on one of them, we have {ko'a ca'e goi ko'e} => {mi goirgau ko'a ca'e ko'e} => {mi goirgau ko'a ko'e xoi mi ca'engau do'e ko'a}
20:29 < durka42> so it works
20:29 < noncomcinse> like with zo 'bu'
20:29 < noncomcinse> .i ca'e lu zo bu bu li'u sumti
20:29 < noncomcinse> .i ca'e lu zo bu bu bu bu bu bu bu li'u sumti
20:29 < zipcpi> goingau, you mean :p
20:30 < noncomcinse> .i me pa sumti
20:30 < durka42> yes
20:30 < durka42> though I checked, ra'oi goi rafsi no da
20:30 < zipcpi> u'i
20:30 < durka42> it's going... going... goingau!
20:30 < noncomcinse> The only problem is you can't stick UI in between *eks and {nai}.
20:30 < noncomcinse> .u'i
20:30 < durka42> can't you?
20:30 < zipcpi> Yay for magic predicates
20:31 < noncomcinse> camxes: .i mi klama je .ui nai klaku
20:31 < camxes> (i [mi CU] [klama {je <ui nai>} klaku] VAU)
20:31 < durka42> oh oh right
20:31 < durka42> because the nai attaches
20:32 < noncomcinse> Unrelated, is there a way to do illogical forethought connectives in ba'e classical Lojban?
20:32 < zipcpi> Oh I have a new slate of zi'evla in mind... guess what they do
20:32 < zipcpi> ki'orbi me'orbi gi'orbi te'orbi pe'orbi xe'orbi ze'orbi go'orbi
20:32 < zipcpi> ju'e
20:32 < zipcpi> ju'egi
20:32 < noncomcinse> en: ju'e
20:32 < mensi> ju'e = [JOI] vague non-logical connective: analogous to plain ".i". |>>> officialdata
20:32 < noncomcinse> Except ju'e doesn't start a new bridi.
20:33 < durka42> mi ka'enai smadi
20:33 < zipcpi> ju'e gi broda gi brode
20:33 < zipcpi> durka42: Binary prefixes. Kibi(byte), mebi(byte), etc
20:33 < durka42> what the note is saying is that where {ge broda gi brode} is like {broda .ije brode}, {ju'egi broda gi brode} is just like {broda .i brode}
20:33 < noncomcinse> off: .i mi fa'u gi klama gi citka fa'u gi lo zarci gi lo titnanba
20:33 < mensi> (i [mi CU] [fa'u gi] [klama VAU] gi [citka {<fa'u gi> <lo zarci KU> gi <lo titnanba KU>} VAU] VAU)
20:33 < zipcpi> Of course, then we need words for bit and byte
20:34 < noncomcinse> zipcpi: pa-?
20:34 < zipcpi> pa- what?
20:34 < noncomcinse> pa'oibi?
20:34 < noncomcinse> pa'orbi*
20:34 < durka42> I would use the existing gismu for those prefixes if I were you
20:34 < durka42> some of them even have rafsi
20:35 < phma> coi rodo
20:35 < noncomcinse> vlatai: ki'oirbi
20:35 < zipcpi> durka42: But they're different from the decimal counterparts
20:35 < noncomcinse> What's the valsi for exponential?
20:35 < durka42> ah these are the binary ones
20:35 < durka42> I always forget which is which
20:35 < noncomcinse> en: exponent
20:35 < mensi> 15 da se tolcri: dektenfa, gei, ni'e'ei, ni'e'oi, te'au'u, tenfa, te'o, aigne, be'ei'oi, cpolinomi'a,
20:35 < mensi> dekykemymecnontenfa, dekyki'otenfa, nonsmitenfa, te'a, te'ai
20:35 < noncomcinse> en: gei
20:35 < mensi> gei = [VUhU2] trinary mathematical operator: order of magnitude/value/base; [b * (c to the a power)]. |>>>
20:35 < mensi> officialdata
20:35 < zipcpi> Yeah ki'orbi doesn't mean kilobyte. It means 1024
20:36 < durka42> .i'e
20:36 < zipcpi> ni'e'ei? lol
20:36 < durka42> krtis...
20:36 < durka42> vlaste: ni'e'ei
20:36 < vlaste> ni'e'ei = digit/number: Niven's greatest-exponent prime factorization constant; lim_(n->∞) (avg_n (H)) ≈ 1.705211…
20:36 < phma> ma po'u na'ebo la .camgusmis. ka'e refcfagau le selfu?
20:36 < noncomcinse> How about a valsi for 'x1 is a digital data storage unit with byte-count x3 to the power of x2'?
20:37 < zipcpi> Well gleki has proposed {bitsi} for bit
20:37 < noncomcinse> This def uses byte-count
20:37 < zipcpi> But that leaves byte
20:37 < noncomcinse> cei broda
20:38 < zipcpi> He wanted to use {bivbitsi}, but {ki'orbybivbitsi} is a bit long
20:38 < durka42> bibybitsi
20:38 < durka42> oh whoops
20:38 < noncomcinse> bit = lo broda be 2 bei -3
20:38 < noncomcinse> 2^-3 is 1/8, right?
20:38 < noncomcinse> I'm not screwing up my math?
20:38 < durka42> baitsi
20:38 < durka42> yes
20:39 < noncomcinse> er, lo broda be -3 bei 2
20:39 < noncomcinse> Because I put the power as x2
20:39 < durka42> you'd want three places if you were going to split up the number like that though
20:39 < zipcpi> I don't believe in these predicates when pretty much all computers in the world uses 8-bits per byte; not to mention bits aren't arbitrary
20:39 < durka42> in order to be able to say, e.g. 10GB
20:39 < durka42> but I would just have one place for the number
20:39 < durka42> zipcpi: that's not culturally neutral :p
20:39 < zipcpi> 8-bits per byte is, but pretty much all computers in the world use it
20:40 < durka42> even the C standard doesn't guarantee 8 bits per byte
20:40 < noncomcinse> x1 = x2 * (x4^x3) -- pei
20:40 < durka42> right that's basically how {gei} works
20:40 < zipcpi> durka42: For what, aliens? I don't give a mabla about cultural neutrality wrt imaginary cultures; if they need words for their concepts, they can make their own
20:41 < noncomcinse> 10GB bitsi 10 9 10
20:41 < noncomcinse> 5GB bitsi 4 9 10
20:41 < noncomcinse> s/4/5/
20:41 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: 5GB bitsi 5 9 10
20:41 < noncomcinse> vlaste: fenki
20:41 < vlaste> fenki = x1 (action/event) is crazy/insane/mad/frantic/in a frenzy (one sense) by standard x2.
20:41 < noncomcinse> xu sampre
20:41 < phma> when I was learning computers, there were computers with 36-bit words and computers with 18-bit registers and 60-bit registers
20:42 < zipcpi> Hmm... then maybe there can be predicates for those too
20:42 < noncomcinse> 5GiB bitsi 5 9 8
20:42 < zipcpi> But 8-bit has become a standard and therefore deserves a word
20:42 < phma> lo itsi cu bitsi
20:42 < zipcpi> Rather than forcing us to fill extra places all the time
20:42 < durka42> bitsi li mu li no li pano / bitsi li pano gei mu ge'a no
20:42 < noncomcinse> en: makfu
20:42 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
20:43 < noncomcinse> en: makfa
20:43 < mensi> makfa = x1 is magic/supernatural/sorcery/witchcraft/wizardry to x2, performed by person/force/deity x3. |>>> See also
20:43 < mensi> krici, manci. |>>> officialdata
20:43 < noncomcinse> zipcpi: ko djuno lodu'u makau makfa gi'e me zo zo'e
20:43 < durka42> zipcpi: why not just something like baitsi = x1 is a byte / set of x2 (default 8) bits
20:43 < zipcpi> xo'e?
20:43 < noncomcinse> 5GB bitsi 5 9 zo'e
20:43 < noncomcinse> zo'e = lo'o xo'e
20:44 < zipcpi> durka42: That'd give a chance for zmico to be useful D:
20:44 < noncomcinse> I need a diode equals sign
20:44 < durka42> eww
20:44 < zipcpi> lol
20:44 < noncomcinse> en: zmico
20:44 < mensi> 11 da se tolcri: gafyzmico, sumyzmico, dai'o, dau'a, de'au, de'oi, di'au, di'ei, di'oi, do'ai,
20:44 < mensi> doi'a
20:44 < noncomcinse> y
20:44 < zipcpi> downvoted lol
20:44 < noncomcinse> vlaste: zmico
20:44 < vlaste> 10 results: gafyzmico, sumyzmico, dai'o, dau'a, de'au, de'oi, di'ei, di'oi, do'ai, doi'a
20:44 < noncomcinse> ue
20:44 < noncomcinse> na se nelci
20:45 < durka42> ni'udzau
20:45 < zipcpi> It's a controversial set of cmavo that Curtis put in
20:45 < noncomcinse> I read downvoted as JVS-downvote before remembering Reddit uses downvotes and questioning it.
20:45 < zipcpi> Yes, I mean JVS downvoted
20:45 < noncomcinse> ju'o
20:45 < noncomcinse> losu'u me'oi .reddit. co'e cu xamsku
20:46 < noncomcinse> si se xamsku
20:46 < zipcpi> But from what I gather, basically it messes with defaults
20:46 < noncomcinse> What does?
20:46 < noncomcinse> zmico?
20:47 < zipcpi> Yep
20:47 < phma> rlpowell: la .lojban.org. spofu .i.e'o ko refcfagau
20:47 < noncomcinse> default whats
20:47 < zipcpi> default terbri specifications; e.g. that default 8
20:47 < zipcpi> or the default 1 for lo se mitre
20:47 < noncomcinse> ma default default?
20:47 < noncomcinse> xu zo zo'e
20:48 < durka42> the zmico are a set of like 1000 cmavo that curtis created in order to obsessively micromanage the defaults for the sumti places in a given sentence, and they would be impossible for humans to use in practice
20:48 < zipcpi> lol
20:48 < phma> what's zmico?
20:48 < durka42> ^
20:48 < noncomcinse> >what's zmica
20:48 < noncomcinse> noda djuno
20:48 < noncomcinse> sa
20:48 < noncomcinse> pa da djuno
20:48 < noncomcinse> .i lo zbasu cu djuno
20:48 < noncomcinse> .au
20:49 < noncomcinse> .a'u
20:49 < zipcpi> no drata be zy cu djuno iau li'a
20:49 < noncomcinse> si .a'o
20:49 < phma> zmoci
20:49 < noncomcinse> .i mi na se slabu lo ro cmavo be ma'oi UI
20:49 < noncomcinse> de'a
20:50 < zipcpi> durka42: Yeah you're probably right. I mean if anyone really needed {baitsi be lo pabi} they should just {cei} it to something else
20:51 < zipcpi> Er, li pa bi I mena
20:51 < zipcpi> *mean
20:51 < phma> what does the seed force to happen?
20:52 < durka42> ki'a
20:53 < noncomcinse> .idi'a
20:53 < phma> or does something force the seed to sprout?
20:53 < noncomcinse> I should honestly take flash cards for UI
20:53 < durka42> physics?
20:53 < noncomcinse> the nutrients inside cause a chemical reaction?
20:53 < phma> xu lo baitsi cu me lo tsiju poi bapli?
20:54 < durka42> ua .u'i
20:54 < durka42> forgot ts- was a valid initial
20:54 < zipcpi> Oh oops
20:54 < zipcpi> zbaiti?
20:55 < noncomcinse> tsani, tsali
20:55 < zipcpi> k: zbaiti
20:55 < mensi> (CU [Z:zbaiti VAU])
20:55 < noncomcinse> melo tsiju?
20:55 < zipcpi> ki'orbyzbaiti
20:55 < noncomcinse> I always elide that space ,u'i
20:56 < durka42> melo yellow
20:56 < phma> jgari, jbari, jdari
20:56 < noncomcinse> dz*
20:56 < phma> melo bisli
20:56 < noncomcinse> 'melo'=''
20:56 < durka42> "among the"
20:57 < noncomcinse> yeah
20:57 < noncomcinse> fair
20:57 < noncomcinse> I always get confuse
20:57 < noncomcinse> Because someone said that 'melo broda'='broda'
20:58 < phma> red=grey
20:58 < phma> lo julne cu terlanme
20:58 < phma> julne ja seltcana
20:58 < zipcpi> How do we even define defaults in Lojban anyway?
20:59 < zipcpi> ... zmico? *ducks*
21:00 < noncomcinse> pe'i
21:00 < noncomcinse> all are zo'e
21:00 < noncomcinse> You don't get to define a default, it's just zo'e
21:00 < zipcpi> Some words already have defaults
21:01 < noncomcinse> We could just ignore them, and pretend zo'e?
21:01 < noncomcinse> I dunno.
21:01 < zipcpi> I'm not gonna do that for {mitre}
21:01 < noncomcinse> Contextually, you can generally assume someone means 1.
21:02 < noncomcinse> Actually
21:02 < noncomcinse> Having defaults is a good idea.
21:03 < durka42> jbo:mitre
21:03 < mensi> mitre = x1 klani x2 lo sornai rauci'e ni clani
21:03 < durka42> en:mitre
21:03 < mensi> mitre = x1 is x2 meter(s) [metric unit] in length (default 1) measured in direction x3 by standard x4.
21:03 < durka42> yyy
21:03 < durka42> is that supposed to be a lujvo
21:03 < durka42> 'cause it's not
21:03 < durka42> jbo: mitre
21:03 < mensi> mitre = x1 klani x2 lo sornai rauci'e ni clani |>>> klani; sornai; rauci'e; clani; minli; gutci |>>>
21:03 < mensi> xorxes
21:04 < noncomcinse> ma lujvo xudai
21:04 < zipcpi> Probably defined before we defined sornairauci'e
21:04 < durka42> lu rau ci'e li'u
21:04 < zipcpi> Oh oops
21:04 < zipcpi> OOPS
21:04 < noncomcinse> camxes: fabu klani febu lo sornai rauci'e ni clani
21:04 < camxes> ([{<fa bu> BOI} CU] [klani {<(¹fe bu¹) BOI> <lo sornai KU> <rau BOI> <ci'e (¹ni [clani VAU] KEI¹)> KU} VAU])
21:04 < zipcpi> xorxes made a mistake! GASP
21:04 < durka42> .u'i
21:04 < noncomcinse> .i gendra
21:04 < durka42> yeah there's no way that is intended
21:04 < durka42> seems like he did leave out the default though
21:04 < noncomcinse> I'm not sure what all those gismu mean
21:04 < durka42> klani clani
21:05 < noncomcinse> en: ni
21:05 < mensi> ni = [NU] abstractor: quantity/amount abstractor; x1 is quantity/amount of [bridi] measured on scale x2. |>>>
21:05 < mensi> officialdata
21:05 < noncomcinse> Right.
21:05 < noncomcinse> I know all the CV cmavo
21:05 < noncomcinse> but not all the time
21:05 < noncomcinse> If I think of the English, I can recall the Lojban pretty well.
21:06 < durka42> wait a minute why the hell did that sentence parse
21:06 < noncomcinse> IKR
21:06 < durka42> a quantified BAI-term...?
21:06 < noncomcinse> rau < PA ni
21:06 < durka42> camxes: rau bai broda
21:06 < camxes> ([{rau BOI} {bai broda} KU] VAU)
21:07 < noncomcinse> oh, rau ci'e
21:07 < noncomcinse> What.
21:07 < durka42> oh right it's just a selbritcita
21:07 < noncomcinse> What the hell...?
21:07 < noncomcinse> You can quantify tcita?
21:07 < durka42> rau ci'e ni clani => rau da poi ci'e zo'e ni clani
21:08 < noncomcinse> camxes: .i mi klama su'o mu'i
21:08 < durka42> no it's an unfilled tcita
21:08 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,], [nN] or [rR] but "m" found.
21:08 < noncomcinse> camxes: +s fabu klani febu lo sornai rauci'e ni clani
21:08 < camxes> ([{<FA:fa BU:bu> BOI} CU] [G:klani {<(¹FA:fe BU:bu¹) BOI> <LE:lo L:sornai KU> <PA:rau BOI> <BAI:ci'e (¹NU:ni [G:clani VAU] KEI¹)> KU} VAU])
21:08 < noncomcinse> Um
21:08 < zipcpi> k: kirbizbaiti
21:08 < mensi> (CU [Z:kirbizbaiti VAU])
21:08 < durka42> no it makes sense I figured it out :)
21:08 < durka42> tersmus: jbo: fabu klani febu lo sornai rauci'e ni clani
21:08 < tersmus> cy no sornai .i rau boi da poi ci'e ku zo'u ke'a ni ce'u clani kei ku'o zo'u fa bu klani fe bu cy no da
21:08 < zipcpi> Hmm... maybe those are better "lujvo"
21:09 < zipcpi> Still keep the ki'orbi etc though
21:09 < durka42> hey, tersmus agrees with my expansion :)
21:09 < noncomcinse> zo ki'orbi na lujvo
21:09 < noncomcinse> What's the expansion?
21:09 < durka42> hence the scare quotes
21:09 < durka42> rau ci'e ni clani => rau da poi ci'eku ni clani
21:09 < durka42> it's a quantified sumti
21:09 < noncomcinse> rau ci'e ni clani = PA BAI NU GISMU
21:09 < durka42> it just looks really strange :p
21:10 < noncomcinse> = BAI PA da poi BAI ke'a ku NU GISMU -- xu
21:10 < noncomcinse> s/BAI PA/PA/
21:10 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: = PA da poi BAI ke'a ku NU GISMU -- xu
21:11 < noncomcinse> I just had this thought, like, "I wonder if this bot can do extended regular expressions?"
21:11 < noncomcinse> .i mi cipra co sampre
21:11 < durka42> poi BAI ke'a NU GISMU, or poi ke'a BAI zo'e NU  GISMU?
21:12 < durka42> noncomcinse: well it support s/x/y/gi at least, not sure what else?
21:12 < zipcpi> k: kirbibitsi
21:12 < mensi> (CU [Z:kirbibitsi VAU])
21:12 < durka42> s/SUPPORT/supports/i
21:12 < fenki> durka42 meant to say: noncomcinse: well it supports s/x/y/gi at least, not sure what else?
21:12 < noncomcinse> .i mi cipra co sampre
21:12 < noncomcinse> s/cipra ?/cIpra/
21:12 < noncomcinse> .i mi cipra co sampre
21:13 < durka42> guess not
21:13 < noncomcinse> s/[cip]/_/g
21:13 < noncomcinse> Aw.
21:13 < noncomcinse> ui nai
21:13 < noncomcinse> tolcmila bu
21:13 < noncomcinse> It least it does /g?
21:13 < noncomcinse> .u'i
21:14 < noncomcinse> inb4 bot for `tr'.
21:14 < noncomcinse> .tr "a-z'" "A-Zh"
21:14 < noncomcinse> {.tr} is the call for eobot to translate on #Esperanto.
21:15 < noncomcinse> .tr eo en novas
21:15 < noncomcinse> It didn't like translating to Lojban.
21:15 < noncomcinse> 23:15 <noncomcinse> .tr eo jbo novas
21:15 < noncomcinse> 23:15 <EoBot> .tr: nekonata komando. Por helpo vidu http://www.zz9pza.net/eobot/helpo
21:16 < noncomcinse> eo: novas
21:16 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
21:16 < noncomcinse> jbo: novas
21:16 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
21:16 < noncomcinse> zo'oi .novas. cu simsa zo cnino
21:16 < noncomcinse> eo: cnino
21:16 < mensi> cnino = x1 estas nova/nekonata por observanto x2 en trajto x3 (ka) laŭ normo x4; x1 estas novaĵo |>>> Vidu ankaŭ nuzba,
21:16 < mensi> slabu, citno, se djuno. |>>> xorxes
21:17 < zipcpi> I prefer something like membitsi for arbitrary bit-group, then define zbaiti as membitsi be li bi
21:17 < noncomcinse> la'oi .EoBot. pilno la'oi .GoogleTranslate. xoi mi jimpe
21:18 < zipcpi> Cause leaving it as zo'e is precisely why we have confusion right now with {tirxu} and {minli}
21:18 < durka42> at first I thought you meant "tr" the unix command, .u'i
21:20 < noncomcinse> .tr "a-z'" "A-Zh" -- was
21:20 < noncomcinse> at least it was an idea for a fenki-style bot
21:20 < zipcpi> That's why I don't think too much about cultural neutrality. I define words for what I want them to mean; other people who find other concepts useful can define words to mean what *they* want to mean
21:20 < noncomcinse> ./msg eobot .tr LANG_IN LANG_OUT [text]
21:21 < noncomcinse> ku'i pilno GoogleTranslate
21:21 < zipcpi> There's enough zi'evla space, and some would say gismu space even, for all of us
21:21 < zipcpi> Not sure about cmavo though :p
21:22 < noncomcinse> Not enough room in the, uh
21:22 < noncomcinse> vlaste: city
21:22 < vlaste> 16 results: tcadu, tcabriju, jarbu, tcakamni, banxe'osu, gugdevu'a, latmnroma, bryklyn, tapla, taksi…
21:22 < noncomcinse> tcadu
21:22 < noncomcinse> va'u re mi'o
21:22 < noncomcinse> or zu'e re mi'o
21:22 < noncomcinse> Not enough room in this tcadu for re mi'o.
21:25 < noncomcinse> nardjuno
21:27 < zipcpi> OK... that's 43 words to enter D:
21:28 < noncomcinse> what iis
21:28 < zipcpi> ki'orbi me'orbi gi'orbi te'orbi pe'orbi xe'orbi ze'orbi go'orbi
21:28 < zipcpi> bitsi bitsymei zbaiti
21:28 < zipcpi> kirbizbaiti merbizbaiti girbizbaiti terbizbaiti perbizbaiti xerbizbaiti zerbizbaiti gorbizbaiti
21:28 < zipcpi> kiltyzbaiti megyzbaiti gigyzbaiti tetyzbaiti petyzbaiti xexyzbaiti zepyzbaiti gotyzbaiti
21:28 < zipcpi> kirbibitsi merbibitsi girbibitsi terbibitsi perbibitsi xerbibitsi zerbibitsi gorbibitsi
21:28 < zipcpi> ki'orbitsi megbitsi gigbitsi tetybitsi petybitsi xexybitsi zepybitsi gotybitsi
21:28 < noncomcinse> ueua
21:28 < noncomcinse> Can we script JVS?
21:28 < noncomcinse> Or just have a script directly modify the database?
21:29 < durka42> gleki has an autoimporter script
21:29 < noncomcinse> Cool.
21:29 < zipcpi> I dunno if he'll share with me though T.T
21:29 < noncomcinse> Or, you know, just make a gismu for it.
21:29 < zipcpi> I don't think he trusts me T.T
21:29 < zipcpi> {bitsi} is a gismu
21:29 < noncomcinse> I break stuff. It's like my specialty. I should never have such a script.
21:30 < noncomcinse> The first time I got my hands on AutoHotKey...
21:30 < zipcpi> Gleki invented it, but didn't enter it into JVS
21:31 < noncomcinse> x1 is data storage with byte-size x2 * x4 ^ x3.
21:31 < noncomcinse> Alternatively,
21:31 < noncomcinse> x1 is data storage with byte-size x2 * x4 ^ ( x3 * 3 ).
21:31 < noncomcinse> So that way a 1KB = lo bitsi be fi li pa
21:32 < noncomcinse> Rather than having to work out multiples of 3 in your head.
21:32 < zipcpi> I don't want to do that mental calculation just to know what it corresponds to
21:32 < noncomcinse> Fair.
21:32 < noncomcinse> xoi stace zo'u I already do that.
21:33 < noncomcinse> KB is 1-power of a thousand in my head
21:33 < zipcpi> There's a reason those SI prefix stuff exists though
21:33 < noncomcinse> Or, alternatively even, just put the x4 as lipaki'o
21:33 < noncomcinse> Wait, are those prefixes here, in lojbobau?
21:33 < noncomcinse> Beyond ki'o, I mean.
21:33 < zipcpi> Yes, kilto, megdo, gigdo, etc
21:35 < noncomcinse> ua
21:35 < noncomcinse> How high does that go?
21:35 < noncomcinse> peta, tera?
21:35 < zipcpi> gotro
21:35 < noncomcinse> en: gotro
21:35 < zipcpi> All the way to yotta
21:35 < mensi> gotro = x1 is 10^24 of x2 in dimension/aspect x3 (default is units). |>>> See also grake, mitre, snidu, stero, delno,
21:35 < mensi> molro, kelvo, xampo, gradu. litce, merli, centi, decti, dekto, femti, gigdo, gocti, kilto, megdo, mikri, milti, nanvi,
21:35 < mensi> petso, picti, terto, xatsi, xecto, xexso, zepti, zetro |>>> officialdata
21:35 < noncomcinse> rafsi: gotro
21:35 < mensi> zo'oi got .e zo'oi gotr rafsi zo gotro
21:35 < noncomcinse> pa valsi
21:35 < noncomcinse> Damn.
21:35 < noncomcinse> And I thought terabytes were big.
21:36 < noncomcinse> Until I started using flacs.
21:36 < noncomcinse> zo'o
21:36 < durka42> .u'i
21:37 < noncomcinse> .i ku'i lo zgike datni zo'u bitsi li repa li ci li paki'o
21:37 < noncomcinse> 21GB
21:38 < noncomcinse> .i du'e vidni cu jai datni
21:38 < durka42> gigyzbaiti li repa
21:39 < durka42> or is it girbizbaiti
21:39 < durka42> I'm already confused
21:39 < zipcpi> lol
21:39 < zipcpi> Do we need a set for "I dunno which"?
21:39 < zipcpi> Kinda sucks that we're in that mess
21:40 < zipcpi> The ones who came out with KB for 1024 weren't Lojbanists, that's why
21:40 < noncomcinse> gigyzbaiti has a redundant y
21:40 < zipcpi> mumble mumble grumble
21:40 < zipcpi> It's for consistency
21:40 < noncomcinse> nelci mutce
21:41 < noncomcinse> Just don't try to start putting ybu everywhere
21:41 < zipcpi> Because tetzbaiti is not a valid zi'evla
21:41 < noncomcinse> you know the /[aeiou]'y/ reform?
21:41 < zipcpi> Yes
21:41 < noncomcinse> We can't do y'y for ybu
21:41 < noncomcinse> Because y'y is for {'}
21:41 < zipcpi> I entered {iy'y}
21:41 < noncomcinse> But we could, but where would {'} go?
21:41 < noncomcinse> .i xu cmavo gendra
21:41 < zipcpi> But yeah that inconstency sucks
21:42 < zipcpi> I think it's morphologically acceptable
21:42 < noncomcinse> Minor annoyances of Lojban:
21:42 < noncomcinse> ter
21:42 < noncomcinse> ji
21:42 < noncomcinse> .iy'y
21:42 < noncomcinse> ({gi'i} is okay, though.
21:42 < zipcpi> ji is fixed by selpa'i-s connective system
21:42 < noncomcinse> Whooo.
21:43 < noncomcinse> The thing is
21:43 < noncomcinse> thatt .iy'u is CREATED by a proposal
21:43 < noncomcinse> It wasn't a problem before.
21:43 < zipcpi> Yeah
21:44 < noncomcinse> I'll bet it was started because someone said {lu zo .abu li'u na drani}
21:44 < zipcpi> exp: zo abu
21:44 < mensi> ([{<zo a> bu} BOI] VAU)
21:44 < zipcpi> OK yeah lol
21:44 < zipcpi> exp: zo ybu
21:44 < mensi> ([zo ybu] VAU)
21:45 < zipcpi> Hahahahaha
21:45 < zipcpi> ybu is special
21:45 < noncomcinse> exp: zo .abu
21:45 < mensi> ([{<zo a> bu} BOI] VAU)
21:45 < noncomcinse> uat
21:45 < noncomcinse> sa'ei
21:45 < noncomcinse> .uat.
21:45 < noncomcinse> Why?
21:45 < noncomcinse> exp: zo .ybu
21:45 < mensi> ([zo ybu] VAU)
21:45 < zipcpi> Because {y} is invisible anywhere else
21:45 < noncomcinse> off: zo .ybu
21:45 < mensi> ([zo ybu] VAU)
21:46 < noncomcinse> What.
21:46 < zipcpi> So {ybu} gets combined in the very first level of processing
21:46 < noncomcinse> I'm done.
21:46 < zipcpi> lol
21:46 < noncomcinse> Well
21:46 < noncomcinse> See, on any other chat system, I'd type /quit, but here, that would actually quit me.
21:46 < durka42> add that special case to the minor annoyance list please
21:46 < noncomcinse> % exec sh quit
21:46 < noncomcinse> Yes.
21:46 < noncomcinse> also
21:47 < zipcpi> {xa'i mi oicli'a}?
21:47 < noncomcinse> camxes: .cmen. mi tavla ma
21:47 < camxes> (cmen [mi CU] [tavla {ma VAU}])
21:47 < noncomcinse> This.
21:47 < zipcpi> exp: cmen mi tavla ma
21:47 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "a" found.
21:47 < noncomcinse> ti'e Remnant of Loglann.
21:47 < noncomcinse> s/nn/n/
21:47 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: ti'e Remnant of Loglan.
21:47 < noncomcinse> I just like seeing this bot fix things.
21:48 < noncomcinse> .i la'e di'u
21:48 < noncomcinse> mutce loka ce'u gasnu lonu mi ckaji
21:48 < noncomcinse> ce'u se zdile
21:48 < zipcpi> durka42: Do you prefer {kirbizbaiti} or {kirbibaiti}?
21:48 < noncomcinse> vau kei ku vau kei ku vau kei ku vau
21:49 < zipcpi> And I still dunno what to do about the ambiguous case
21:49 < durka42> the second one I think
21:49 < durka42> which ambiguous case?
21:49 < zipcpi> Where you don't know whether to translate "KB" as {kiltyzbaiti} or {kirbibaiti}
21:49 < noncomcinse> What's the difference in the rafsi?
21:50 < noncomcinse> Oh, is it just a y->i?
21:50 < durka42> zipcpi: that's not lojban's problem...
21:50 < noncomcinse> lty->rbi
21:50 < zipcpi> First is based off kilto, second is based off ki'orbi
21:50 < durka42> kirbibaiti is a zi'evla
21:50 < zipcpi> kilto = 1000
21:50 < zipcpi> ki'orbi = 1024
21:50 < noncomcinse> Well, KB =/=KiB
21:50 < noncomcinse> KB = 1000
21:50 < noncomcinse> KiB = 1024
21:51 < noncomcinse> .isampu
21:51 < zipcpi> Because the malpre who misused SI prefixes weren't Lojbanists, that's why
21:51 < noncomcinse> Make both for every version?
21:51 < noncomcinse> Or
21:51 < noncomcinse> What do you have so far?
21:51 < noncomcinse> Do the ones you have so far use base-2 or base-10?
21:51 < zipcpi> I'm making a set for both decimal and binary
21:52 < zipcpi> I mean two sets
21:52 < zipcpi> one for decimal, one for binary
21:52 < zipcpi> The problem is that some systems *mumble Windows grumble* still use KB for binary
21:53 < zipcpi> binary: kirbibaiti merbibaiti girbibaiti terbibaiti perbibaiti xerbibaiti zerbibaiti gorbibaiti
21:53 < durka42> yes
21:53 < zipcpi> decimal: kiltyzbaiti megyzbaiti gigyzbaiti tetyzbaiti petyzbaiti xexyzbaiti zepyzbaiti gotyzbaiti
21:53 < durka42> them and deceptive hard drive manufacturers
21:53 < zipcpi> No, the deceptive hard drive manufacturers use the decimal
21:53 < zipcpi> Then when you load them up on Windows... eh?
21:53 < durka42> right
21:54 < noncomcinse> Widows uses KiB?
21:54 < zipcpi> Yes, but calls it KB
21:54 < noncomcinse> And HDD make--
21:54 < noncomcinse> There is a very good reason I don't use Windows, then.
21:54 < zipcpi> lol
21:55 < noncomcinse> It's official, never going back.
21:55 < noncomcinse> Ever.
21:55 < noncomcinse> Nope.
21:55 < noncomcinse> At least some people tell you how many bytes you have.
21:55 < zipcpi> I dunno. I have people tell me they just don't like the binary prefixes
21:55 < zipcpi> And I'm like... I prefer to know exactly how many bytes I'm talking about tyvm
21:55 < noncomcinse> But it's not exactly the HDD manufacturers that are lying.
21:56 < durka42> well they sound stupid
21:56 < noncomcinse> They say "1 TB".
21:56 < zipcpi> Especially since the higher up the ladder you climb, the more the discrepancy grows
21:56 < durka42> but they do make more sense :)
21:56 < noncomcinse> Not "1 TiB"
21:56 < noncomcinse> Okay. Screw the prefixes, I'm counting it by sectors.
21:56 < zipcpi> Yes, it's Windows that "lies"; but mostly it's more inertia than anything
21:56 < durka42> ok, bedtime
21:56 < durka42> co'o
21:57 < noncomcinse> co'o la durkavore
21:57 < zipcpi> That ambiguity has existed since the beginning of time, then the computer-world equivalent of xorxes came up with these new prefixes
21:58 < zipcpi> And RAM is still often given in terms of "GB" when "GiB" is meant
21:58 < zipcpi> Heck it dates all the way back to floppy disks. 1.44 MB becomes 1.38 MiB when you load it up in Windows
21:59 < zipcpi> And back then MiB didn't exist
21:59 < noncomcinse> But Windows still says it's 1.44MB
21:59 < noncomcinse> s/44/38/
21:59 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: But Windows still says it's 1.38MB
21:59 < zipcpi> Exactly
21:59 < zipcpi> But back then MiB didn't exist
21:59 < zipcpi> So MB was ambiguous
21:59 < noncomcinse> And that's why it said 1.38M
21:59 < noncomcinse> B
22:00 < noncomcinse> cipra cipra
22:00 < zipcpi> Then someone came up with the new prefixes
22:00 < zipcpi> And now they're trying to make it standard
22:00 < noncomcinse> s/CIPRA/snada/gi
22:00 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: snada snada
22:00 < zipcpi> But it hasn't trickled down completely yet
22:00 < zipcpi> So MB is still ambiguous for now
22:00 < noncomcinse> je'e
22:00 < noncomcinse> ie
22:00 < noncomcinse> Just count it in straight sectors.
22:00 < noncomcinse> Count literal hardware.
22:00 < zipcpi> lol
22:01 < noncomcinse> cfdisk says use M/G/T for MiB/GiB/TiB
22:02 < noncomcinse> .oi
22:03 < noncomcinse> First off, I don't even know the way to say "terminal emulator", and second off, mi na djuno lodu'u makau mi se nitcu lonu lo samselpla cu tolspofu
22:05  * nuzba @lycaon_ebooks: I'M GONNA explode (it's 😉😏😘 I feel the need to get to the one hand, how can a being living such a shitty teen lojban is the "um, actually [http://bit.ly/1C0UwLC]
22:11 < Simorgh> Ìû
22:20 < zipcpi> ta'o I have an idea for how to deal with Mr./Ms. etc
22:20 < zipcpi> Namely cmevla prefixes
22:20 < zipcpi> e.g. .ionan. .ionin.
22:20 < zipcpi> e.g. {la .ionan.djonz.
22:20 < zipcpi> }
22:21 < zipcpi> Relies on BCM for brivlacme though
22:21 < zipcpi> {la .ionan. zipcpi}
22:22 < zipcpi> We could make them zi'evla but then it'd rely on BCM for the opposite case :p
22:23 < zipcpi> I have a pretty simple system for them though
22:23 < zipcpi> iolna iolni iolpe iosna iosni iospe
22:24 < zipcpi> iol- may be married or unmarried; ios- is for married
22:24 < zipcpi> Up to your culture how you want to use them
22:26 < zipcpi> But being brivla can also be useful.... {doi iolna} = "Sir,"
22:26 < zipcpi> Wait that also works with cmevla
22:28 < zipcpi> Still, {lo iolna} or {le iolna} could prove useful
22:40 < zipcpi> Tentative definition: e.g. iolnan: {x1 is a Mr. (male, married or unmarried, bearer of honorific title), recognized by x2}
22:44 < zipcpi> iolna sorry
22:49 < zipcpi> I think these are a nice set though. Even gives one for married males to use if they desire, where English doesn't make the distinction
22:49 < zipcpi> And if there are other cultures that could use more distinctions, they can add them
22:57 < gleki> lo iolna be fa la djonz
22:58 < gleki> mister jones
22:58 < zipcpi> Yeah that's another possibility
23:00 < gleki> because e.g. "Miss" can be a personal name
23:00 < zipcpi> {lo iolna po'u la .djonz.} also works
23:00 < zipcpi> Right
23:03 < gleki> oh well ishould work on eng2jbo dictionary
23:03 < gleki> my Google Spreadsheet formulae exploded due to being very complex.
23:10 < gleki> jb: bitri
23:10 < mensi> bitri = bitri — x1(entity)  is  x2(number)  bits in size
23:10 < mensi> :lo se bitri — bit (data).
23:10 < mensi> :lo vi vreji cu bitri lo kilto — This file is 1000 bit.
23:10 < mensi> :Related words: datni
23:10 < gleki> en: bitsi
23:10 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
23:13 < zipcpi> Wait you decided to make it bitri rather than bitsi?
23:13 < zipcpi> vlaste: bitri (gimka)
23:13 < vlaste> zo bitri gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo bitri gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
23:13 < gleki> because it'd sound like "pizza"
23:13 < zipcpi> u'i
23:13 < gleki> bizzi
23:15 < zipcpi> Anyway I wanted to have zbaiti for byte (yeah I know bivbitsi works but it will make lujvo that much more cumbersome
23:15 < zipcpi> Then I wanted binary prefixes
23:16 < zipcpi> Because I want to keep the SI gismu decimal
23:16 < zipcpi> ki'orbi me'orbi gi'orbi te'orbi pe'orbi xe'orbi ze'orbi go'orbi
23:16 < zipcpi> So then I ended up with a whole slate of words
23:16 < zipcpi> kirbibaiti merbibaiti girbibaiti terbibaiti perbibaiti xerbibaiti zerbibaiti gorbibaiti
23:16 < zipcpi> kiltyzbaiti megyzbaiti gigyzbaiti tetyzbaiti petyzbaiti xexyzbaiti zepyzbaiti gotyzbaiti
23:16 < zipcpi> kirbibitri merbibitri girbibitri terbibitri perbibitri xerbibitri zerbibitri gorbibitri
23:16 < zipcpi> ki'orbitri megbitri gigbitri tetybitri petybitri xexybitri zepybitri gotybitri
23:17 < gleki> i'd avoid C- prefixes
23:17 < gleki> try something like
23:17 < gleki> k:baitri
23:17 < mensi> (CU [L:baitri VAU])
23:17 < gleki> oops
23:17 < gleki> wait
23:17 < zipcpi> Yeah that's why...
23:17 < gleki> no no
23:18 < gleki> wait
23:18 < gleki> k:baitni
23:18 < mensi> (CU [Z:baitni VAU])
23:18 < zipcpi> Hm
23:18 < gleki> a lot of illegal front clusters
23:18 < gleki> i just want to choose something reasonable
23:18 < gleki> same for {sfaile}. too much damage to the opriginal form
23:18 < zipcpi> k: kirbibaitni
23:18 < mensi> (CU [Z:kirbibaitni VAU])
23:19 < gleki> baitli,
23:19 < zipcpi> I like the ni
23:19 < gleki> in french it's octet
23:20 < gleki> sn- and cn- are legal initial clusters
23:21 < gleki> thus any /.+[sc]/ word can't be always suffixed with -ni
23:21 < zipcpi> Right
23:21 < gleki> there is always a danger of it being a lujvo
23:21 < zipcpi> But ml kl, cl, are legal too
23:22 < gleki> i'd rather ban cn/sn
23:22 < gleki> there are many more cluster with -l so no
23:22 < gleki> *clusters
23:22 < zipcpi> I dunno... that will kill a lot of gismu
23:22 < gleki> well, /.+n/ can occur too so a problem will be always
23:23 < gleki> vlaste: cn???
23:23 < vlaste> 7 results: cnano, cnebo, cnemu, cnici, cnino, cnisa, cnita
23:23 < gleki> vlaste: sn???
23:23 < vlaste> 8 results: snada, snanu, snidu, snime, snipa, snuji, snura, snuti
23:23 < zipcpi> Yeah a zi'evla-algorithm is somewhere out there, in the land of unicorns and fairies la'a
23:23 < gleki> oops i dont want that
23:23 < gleki> failyni?
23:23 < zipcpi> lol
23:24 < gleki> robin is not replying
23:24 < zipcpi> T.T
23:25 < Lawrence> Does anybody have advice on where to start in lojban? I speak Esperanto but the resources for lojban aren't as organized
23:26 < gleki> good question. our web server is down :/
23:27 < gleki> but try opening it e.g. tomorrow mw.lojban.org/papri/Learning
23:27 < Lawrence> Oh.. I noticed that.
23:27 < gleki> just bookmark that link
23:27 < Lawrence> Alright thank you!
23:27 < gleki> we need to make a copy of most valuable pages
23:32 < zipcpi> Ugh and during the time it's been down I've came up with 50 words
23:33 < zipcpi> Funnily all of them brivla this time
--- Day changed Thu Jul 02 2015
00:03 < gleki> 23 more questions with a score of 10 or more
00:31 < zipcpi> exp: le iosna je le iosni vu'o po'u la djonz
00:31 < mensi> ([{<le iosna KU> <je (¹le iosni KU¹)>} {vu'o <po'u (¹la djonz KU¹) GEhU>}] VAU)
00:32 < zipcpi> (coi mudri. Testing out new brivla for honorific titles)
00:36 < mudri> .ue .uanai
00:36 < zipcpi> iolna iolni iolpe / iosna iosni iospe
00:36 < zipcpi> iol - unspecified marital status, ios - married
00:37 < zipcpi> na - nanmu, ni - ninmu, pe - prenu
00:37 < gleki> then {baitni} is a byte for women
00:37 < zipcpi> u'i
00:38 <@Broca> What, no prefix for unmarried?
00:39 < zipcpi> I had thought of it but I'm not sure how useful it is; because the married set is for recognizing one as part of their own family
00:39 < zipcpi> Not sure what a set specifically for unmarried would serve
00:40 < zipcpi> Or what form it should take...
01:01 < zipcpi> Hmm... how about "Doctor"? iocre? (since it doesn't just refer to medical doctors)
01:04 < zipcpi> x1 is a "Doctor/Professor" (honorific for having achieved a certain level of education or knowledge), recognized by x2
01:08 < gleki> la djonz [ku] noi profesore
01:09 <@Broca> sensei
01:09 < gleki> no idea why{.io} should be there
01:09 < gleki> en: sensei
01:09 < mensi> [< senpi sepli ≈ Doubt apart] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
01:09 < mensi> sensei[5867], sensep[5898], sensepli[7937], senpysei[7997], senpysep[8028], ...
01:09 < gleki> doubts apart this is a useful lujvo
01:21 < zipcpi> u'i
01:21 < zipcpi> gleki: Same reason the io is part of all the others; it's an honorific
01:21 < zipcpi> Though a brivla specifically for "professor" might be useful
01:22 < zipcpi> Because, culturally, "Doctor" as a title doesn't necessarily refer to a literal doctor
01:22 < gleki> en: professor
01:22 < mensi> 2 da se tolcri: balkulctu, ctuca
01:22 < gleki> en: balkulctu
01:22 < mensi> balkulctu [< banli ckule ctuca ≈ Great school teach] = x1 is a professor teaching audience x2 ideas/methods/lore x3
01:22 < mensi> (du'u) about subject(s) x4 by method x5 (event). |>>> Cf. balcu'e, balkultadni. |>>>
01:22 < mensi> tettaman
01:22 < gleki> .doct professor
01:22 < zipcpi> But merely as a recognition of having achieved a certain level of education, i.e. a PhD
01:23 < gleki> .dict professor
01:23 < fenki> professor — noun: 1. A teacher or faculty member at a college or university, 2. A higher ranking for a teacher or faculty member at a college or university. Abbreviated Prof
01:23 < gleki> 1 word in query. please wait until JVS is back online.
01:55 < zipcpi> Hm I'm actually starting to like the idea of elidable co'e in gadri
01:56 < zipcpi> bu'u lo vuku / bu'u le vuku
01:56 < gleki> alta: lo cu mo
01:56 < mensi> ([FA {lo COhE KU}] [cu {mo VAU}])
01:57 < zipcpi> {leku} could be a useful idiom for anything that you might use a demonstrative for but which actually isn't there to demonstrate
01:58 < zipcpi> It's like "You should know what I'm talking about by context already; there is no need for description. "This"
01:59 < gleki> alta: bu'u le vu cu mo
01:59 < mensi> ([{bu'u <le (¹vu COhE¹) KU>} {FA ZOhE}] [cu {mo VAU}])
01:59 < gleki> alta: bu'u le vu mo
01:59 < mensi> ([{bu'u <le (¹vu mo¹) KU>} {FA ZOhE}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
01:59 < gleki> alta: mi djica lo nu lo plise
01:59 < mensi> ([FA mi] [CU {djica <FE (¹lo [nu {<FA (²lo plise KU²)> <CU (²COhE VAU²)>} KEI] KU¹)> VAU}])
02:00 <@Broca> How does the PEG rule look like? I don't see how you can make an elidable something that isn't a terminator.
02:00 < gleki> are you asking how this alta works?
02:00 <@Broca> I mean, if you make a description *without* co'e, the grammar doesn't insert it, so it doesn't work like an elidable something at all.
02:00 <@Broca> Yes. Yes, I am.
02:01 < gleki> alta: mi djica lo nu lo plise
02:01 < mensi> ([FA mi] [CU {djica <FE (¹lo [nu {<FA (²lo plise KU²)> <CU (²COhE VAU²)>} KEI] KU¹)> VAU}])
02:01 < zipcpi> Alta is very forgiving
02:01 <@Broca> Because it's just an alternative PEG ruleset, right?
02:01 < zipcpi> I dunno if it runs on PEG
02:01 <@Broca> Oh my. Lojban, DWIM-style.
02:02 < gleki> here, Alta is waiting for a selbri but if there isn't then after"/" operator there is another option, namely,selbri_elidible which requires mepty string and outputs selbri_elidible node
02:02 < gleki> yes, Alta is fully in PEG
02:02 < gleki> i didnt want any javascript on top of PEG
02:02 < gleki> cirko is working on an alternative
02:02 < gleki> using javascript, it seems
02:03 < zipcpi> broca: Specifically though, {co'e} is too semantically tied to "thingy" in people's minds, so I'd like to be able to avoid it in the usage scenarios I described
02:03 < gleki> i didnt want anything on top of PEG because the current PEG itself is very strange and not elucidating
02:03 < zipcpi> "All you have to do is meet here there"
02:03 < zipcpi> *meet her there"
02:04 < zipcpi> do bilga fe po'o lo nu penmi le ninmu bu'u...
02:04 < zipcpi> {tu} might not be right if you can't actually point or otherwise signal to it
02:04 <@Broca> I imagine if you feed Alta the empty string it auto-completes to "mi klama le zarci" or something :-)
02:04 < gleki> indeed
02:05 < gleki> i just havent come to autocorrecting everything
02:05 <@Broca> alta:
02:05 < mensi> ([FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
02:05 <@Broca> Ahhahaha!
02:05 < zipcpi> So what I really mean is "there is a place that I think you already know about by context, merely by the description of it being far away
02:05 < gleki> ideally it shouldnt output any errors
02:05 < gleki> a more funny example is
02:05 < gleki> alta: lo nu noi ku
02:05 < mensi> ([FA {lo <(¹nu [{FA ZOhE} {CU <COhE VAU>}] KEI¹) (¹noi [{FA ZOhE} {CU <COhE VAU>}] KUhO¹)> ku}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
02:05 <@Broca> You mean, the purpose of the project is that it should accept everything?
02:06 < gleki> yes, autocorrect everything
02:06 < gleki> it's one of the purposes
02:06 <@Broca> alta: abracadabra
02:06 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] or ['hiI] but "b" found.
02:06 < gleki> another one is te sumti detection using PEG only
02:06 < gleki> Broca: oops, probably not in morphology
02:06 <@Broca> :-)
02:06 < gleki> but that could be autocorrected by prefixing with {la'oi}
02:07 < zipcpi> u'i
02:11 < zipcpi> Specifically though I think elidable selbri in gadri can work without going all the way to alta
02:11 < zipcpi> Just instead of saying "It accepts exactly one selbri", now it's "accepts zero or one"
02:12 < zipcpi> If {ku} or some incompatible thing is encountered, just close it
02:12 < zipcpi> Kinda like how COI can be left empty
02:13 < zipcpi> exp: coi vu
02:13 < mensi> ([coi DOhU] [vu KU] VAU)
02:13 < zipcpi> Right COI doesn't accept sumtcita lol
02:13 < gleki> in alta injecting {co'e} is needed to avoid ruining the concept of selbri
02:13 < zipcpi> Hm
02:14 < gleki> it should be {coi zo'e}, yes. a known issue
02:14 < zipcpi> lol
02:14 < zipcpi> Gotta go. co'o
02:18  * nuzba @464161niftg: lojban › A chart of audio of Lojban phonemes https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/QbFMY_690J0/discussion / la cirko がWikiMediaの音声を集めて表を作つたので、或はそれも有用かも。http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/cirkotci.html [http://bit.ly/1CcxC49]
02:20  * nuzba @464161niftg: .uenai .uinai la http://lojban.org nau spofu cando .i ba ko'oi vitke [http://bit.ly/1Ccy3LY]
03:03 < _mukti_> .oi la jukni cu ca
03:03 < _mukti_> s/ca/ca'o bilma/
03:03 < fenki> _mukti_ meant to say: .oi la jukni cu ca'o bilma
03:10 < gleki> mumble: kmi pu benji SMS boi CGM i ku'i na spusku
03:10 < gleki> *mi
03:10 < gleki> i oise'i
03:10 < gleki> _mukti_: mi pu benji SMS boi CGM i ku'i na spusku
03:11 < _mukti_> ki'e la gleki
03:11 < gleki> i xu la jukni na spuda
03:12 < _mukti_> ie la jukni na frati
03:13 < gleki> mi ca zbasu lo skripto pe lo nu zbasu lo vlaste poi traduki lo glico lo lojbo
03:15 < _mukti_> ue la cirko cu te xatra byfy boi bau lo jbobau se pi'o zo'oi h
03:15 < gleki> sepiho zohoi h ie
03:15 < _mukti_> .u'i
03:15 < gleki> _mukti_: ei ma'a zukte ma va'o lonu la jukni soi'roi co'a spofu
03:16 < gleki> i pe'i lo nu zbasu lo drata kibystuzi cu sarcu
03:16 < _mukti_> lo nu do zbasu lo skripto kei ua .i'e
03:17 < gleki> sa'u mi pu trci lo ka pilno lo formula pe la gugle gredile i ji'asai GQL i ku'i le gredile co'a du'eva'ei masno
03:17 < _mukti_> Switching to English for a moment, because my geekspeak in lojban is ironically impaired
03:17 < gleki> *troci
03:17 < gleki> i never use any lujvo
03:17 < _mukti_> Once jukni is accessible again, I'm going to check the logs for indications of what caused it to become wedged
03:17 < gleki> well, with most people
03:17 < gleki> oh
03:18 < gleki> i just think a github website might be a good alternative
03:19 < _mukti_> I wonder if the internet backbone attack is somehow related to Jukni's outage...
03:19 < gleki> uanai
03:19 < gleki> en: backbone
03:19 < _mukti_> I'm seeing a lot of sites inaccessible, and the server is located in the bay area ia
03:19 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
03:21 < ctefaho> does za'e have a UI version?
03:22 < gleki> en: zi'a
03:22 < mensi> zi'a = [UI3a] nonce-word indicator; indicates previous word is nonce-creation and may be nonstandard |>>> Equivalent to
03:22 < mensi> za'e but in selma'o UI. See also za'e, pe'a, xo'o |>>> gleki
03:22 < gleki> and ba'e=> bi'a
03:22 < keegi> I am reading https://lojban.github.io/cll/18/10/ and I have some questions. 1) xu pano ju'u paxa du paxa 2) xu pano ju'u reno du pano
03:22 < ctefaho> ki'e
03:22 < ctefaho> bi'a I know, just wondered if za'e had an equivalent
03:23 < gleki> xu li pano ju'u pa xa du li paxa
03:23 < ctefaho> zi'a is experimential, correct?
03:23 < gleki> yes
03:23 < gleki> and bi'a
03:24 < ctefaho> bi'a too?
03:24 < _mukti_> ua zo ju'u na nitcu zo li
03:24 < ctefaho> hmm I had gotten the impression that was standard
03:24 < gleki> keegi: im think you are right although just add {li} as i showed
03:24 < gleki> *i think
03:24 < keegi> gleki: thanks, indeed missed {li}
03:24 < _mukti_> A postfix {za'e} ?
03:25 < gleki> en: bi'a
03:25 < mensi> bi'a = [UI3a] emphasis indicator; indicates the previous word is especially emphasized |>>> Equivalent to ba'e but in UI.
03:25 < mensi>  See also ba'e |>>> gleki
03:25 < gleki> just was shutting some selmaho
03:25 < gleki> *shutting down
03:26 < keegi> what about {li pano ju'u papa} is it like base 16 (since we have numbers for it) or is it like base 20 ?
03:26 < ctefaho> so ba'e and bi'a are just forethought vs afterthought then?
03:27 < gleki> oh
03:27 < gleki> i think i got your question
03:27 < gleki> it should be {li pa no ju'u re no cu du li re no}
03:28 < _mukti_> li pa no ju'u re no cu du li re no ju'u pa no
03:28 < gleki> and no lojban still doesnt have words for more than 15
03:28 < keegi> gleki: that's contradicting example 10.8) in that article
03:29 < gleki> keegi: ok. then you are right
03:30 < _mukti_> li pano ju'u reno ju'u pano cu du li reno ju'u pano ju'u pano
03:31 < keegi> _mukti_: li pa pi'e no ju'u re no cu du li re no ju'u pa no
03:33 < _mukti_> pei li no ju'u ma kau du li no
03:33 < _mukti_> .i je li pa ju'u ma kau du li pa
03:34 < _mukti_> li pa ju'u pa cu li pa
03:35 < _mukti_> li papa ju'u li pa du li re ju'u li pano
03:35 < _mukti_> s/ju'u li pa/ju'u pa/
03:35 < fenki> _mukti_ meant to say: li papa ju'u pa du li re ju'u li pano
03:35 < _mukti_> la fenki cu masno milxe
03:37 < _mukti_> ua nai zo pi'e na slabu mi
03:39  * nuzba @lojban_org: @464161niftg http://vrici.lojban.org/~gleki/mediawiki-1.19.2/extensions/ilmentufa/cirkotci.html [http://bit.ly/1NyOK4A]
03:39  * nuzba @lojban_org: @464161niftg http://vrici.lojban.org/~gleki/mediawiki-1.19.2/extensions/ilmentufa/cirkotci.html [http://bit.ly/1NyOMcJ]
03:40 < _mukti_> keegi: Thank you, I see what you mean
03:41 < _mukti_> {pano} being a digit in base 20, {pa pi'e no} being one in the twenties place and zero in the ones place
03:41 < _mukti_> .u'a ua
03:42 < keegi> yes, with exception to base 16 (and possibly base 11..15) where there are explicit digits for 10..15
03:42 < keegi> if i understand it correctly
03:43 < _mukti_> It sounds like you do. So were you saying earlier you found an inconsistency?
03:43 < keegi> no, just unsure about bases 11..15
03:43 < _mukti_> How so?
03:47 < keegi> is { li pano ju'u papa } equal 10 or 11 ? is the correct sequence {li so ju'u papa} {li pano ju'u papa} {li pa pi'e no ju'u papa} or {li so ju'u papa} {li pau ju'u papa} {li pano ju'u papa}  ?
03:47 < keegi> s/pau/dau
03:47 < fenki> keegi meant to say: is { li pano ju'u papa } equal 10 or 11 ? is the correct sequence {li so ju'u papa} {li pano ju'u papa} {li pa pi'e no ju'u papa} or {li so ju'u papa} {li dau ju'u papa} {li pano ju'u papa}  ?
03:48 < phma> en:fiction
03:48 < mensi> 14 da se tolcri: cfika, cumymu'efi'a, fikcku, frafi'a, mi'irlarfi'a, brano, clinu, daskemxarpresmitra, fikrfantasi,
03:48 < mensi> kunrkripto, lisri, ridrdverga, skefi'a, xarpresmitra
03:49 < _mukti_> If {li pano ju'u reno} is equal to decimal 10, as 10.8 suggests then I would assume {li pano ju'u papa} is also equal to decimal 10, with {pano} in each case representing the digit ten
03:49 < _mukti_> i.e. equivalent to {dau}
03:52 < keegi> _mukti_: .u'a ua
03:55 < _mukti_> The rule seems to be, for bases larger than decimal, any number larger than 9 but smaller than the base is assumed to be a digit, and {pi'e} (thank you, new trick for me) is needed if you want multiple digits
03:56 < keegi> except base 16, where you can say {li dau fei gai ju'u pa xa}
03:57 < _mukti_> Right, I mean only when using digits no through so
03:58 < gleki> _mukti_: robin is on vacation
03:58 < _mukti_> ua
03:58 < gleki> you can ask Tene and banseljaj in #jbopre
03:59 < keegi> hm, is then {li pa no ju'u pa xa} same as {li dau ju'u pa xa} ? I thought it was {li pa no ju'u pa xa} same as {li pa pi'e no ju'u pa xa}
04:01 < _mukti_> gleki: Ok, I msg'd them. But in the case they aren't tuned in, and so you know, I'm going to be away at work in the next hour or so.
04:01 < gleki> okay, 
04:01 < gleki> im not an expert here anyway
04:02 < _mukti_> keegi: It would seem from 10.8 that hex is a special case where pano is not assumed to be a digit
04:03 < keegi> .ua u'a
04:03 < _mukti_> Or actually, I'm not sure. Perhaps it's consistent. Is there an example that uses pano ju'u paxa
04:03 < _mukti_> ?
04:03 < _mukti_> pa pi'e no ju'u paxa is unambiguous
04:04 < phma> mensi:spatrxorki
04:04 < gleki> en:spatrxorki
04:04 < mensi> spatrxorki = s1 is an orchid of genus Orchis of species/strain/cultivar s2.
04:04 < gleki> mensi: help
04:04 < mensi> Parsers: type "exp:" (experimental), "off:" (camxes), "gerna:" (jbofi'e), or "yacc:" (official yacc) followed by the text to show the structure of sentences.
04:04 < mensi> Lojban dictionary: type "language-code: word", where language code is one of jbo,en,ru,es,fr,f@,ja,de,eo,zh,hu,sv. This searches in both directions.
04:04 < mensi>     Type "language-code:word" (i.e. without a space after ":") to get a shorter definition.
04:04 < mensi>     "selmaho: ca'a" gives "CAhA", "selmaho: CAhA" gives "bi'ai, ca'a, ..."
04:04 < mensi>     "rafsi: kulnu" gives "klu", "rafsi: klu" gives "kulnu"
04:04 < mensi> Other conlang dictionaries: "toki:", "laadan:", "loglan:"
04:04 < mensi> Lojban <-> Loglan conversion (incomplete): "coi:", "loi:"
04:04 < mensi> "Tatoeba: klama" gets a random example sentence using "klama"
04:04 < mensi> Delayed messaging: type "mensi: doi user message" to send "message" to "user" when they return
04:05 < _mukti_> ue ua
04:05 < gleki> one more function
04:05 < gleki> mensi: gadri
04:05 < mensi> lo [PA] broda = zo'e noi ke'a broda [gi'e zilkancu li PA lo broda]
04:05 < mensi> la [PA] broda = zo'e noi lu [PA] broda li'u cmene ke'a mi
04:05 < mensi> lo PA sumti = lo PA me sumti
04:05 < mensi> la PA sumti = zo'e noi lu PA sumti li'u cmene ke'a mi
04:05 < mensi> loi [PA] broda = lo gunma be lo [PA] broda
04:05 < mensi> lai [PA] broda = lo gunma be la [PA] broda
04:05 < mensi> loi PA sumti = lo gunma be lo PA sumti
04:05 < mensi> lai PA sumti = lo gunma be la PA sumti
04:05 < mensi> lo'i [PA] broda = lo selcmi be lo [PA] broda
04:05 < mensi> la'i [PA] broda = lo selcmi be la [PA] broda
04:05 < mensi> lo'i PA sumti = lo selcmi be lo PA sumti
04:05 < mensi> la'i PA sumti = lo selcmi be la PA sumti
04:05 < mensi> PA sumti = PA da poi ke'a me sumti
04:05 < mensi> PA broda = PA da poi broda
04:05 < mensi> piPA sumti = lo piPA si'e be pa me sumti
04:05 < gleki> a secret periodic table of gadri :)
04:06 < keegi> agreed that using pi'e is unambiguous, no, i haven't found examples that would clarify it
04:06 < b_jonas> coi
04:07 < _mukti_> coi la .ionac.
04:07 < phma> en:curve
04:07 < mensi> curve = x1 is pure/unadulterated/unmitigated/simple in property x2 (ka).
04:07 < phma> en:kruvi
04:07 < mensi> kruvi = x1 is a curve/turn/bend in x2, at locus x3, and defined by set of points/properties x4.
04:08 < phma> en:centaureia
04:08 < mensi> centaureia = x1 is a cornflower of type x2
04:10 < _mukti_> Seriously bad Internet weather today
04:10 < _mukti_> I'm having trouble reaching google news
04:11 < f8l> I can’t reach lojban.org. :-(
04:12 < _mukti_> Yes, lojban.org is down ui nai sai
04:13 < gleki> i think a simpe, static website is necessary
04:13 < gleki> *simple
04:13 < gleki> _mukti_: any suggestions?
04:14 < _mukti_> gleki: Well, one suggestion that occurs to me is that it would be good if access to lojban.org's registration were better distributed. I don't know if Tene or banseljaj has it.
04:14 < _mukti_> This way, we could, in a case like this, at least point lojban.org at a static site.
04:15 < banseljaj> You mean DNS, mukti?
04:15 < _mukti_> Yes, although depending on the registration the DNS may be self-hosted, etc.
04:16 < banseljaj> Yeah I don't know where the DNS is
04:16 < banseljaj> Probably on gandi.net
04:16 < _mukti_> Yep
04:17 < _mukti_> So the registrar does appear to being doing the DNS, too
04:18 < banseljaj> Tene would be the next person to ask
04:18 < gleki> _mukti_: i mean constructing the actual website. any sugegstions of a supersimple CMS?
04:18 < _mukti_> Ok, I msg'd him as well
04:18 < gleki> i only know that MW cant be converted into a static website
04:18 < gleki> automatically
04:18 < phma> DNS doesn't look like the problem.
04:19 < banseljaj> Failover is a problem.
04:19 < _mukti_> No, DNS is not the problem, but we're brainstorming how to better handle outages like this in the future, and if we had the ability to alter the DNS to point away from jukni, we'd be able to at least get a site on line
04:20 < phma> What I'm worried about is, the form for reserving the rooms for jbonunsla have to be signed by today, the names and addresses are mixed up,
04:20 < phma> and with lojban.org down, la lojbab can't get his email.
04:20 < phma> I sent an email to the hotel gal explaining the problem.
04:20 < _mukti_> phma: Maybe I can help with this?
04:21 < b_jonas> i lo tcadu sorprekarce cu se nenri lo goi ko'a su'o seljai .i lo prenu poi sanli cu jgari pa .a re ko'a te zu'e lo nu ra na snuti farlu ka'e lo nu lo karce cu spaji jabre .i ma lojbo valsi lo ka me ko'a
04:21 < phma> maybe. are you an officer?
04:21 < _mukti_> Yes, I'm officially Sec/Treas now.
04:22 < phma> are you Shunpiker?
04:22 < _mukti_> That's my email, yes.
04:23 < phma> Then you should have been getting the emails. Send Lorit an answer and let's see if we can fix this problem.
04:23 < _mukti_> Ok, I'm on it.
04:23 < phma> ki'esai do
04:23 < phma> also cc me and lojbab
04:24 < _mukti_> No problem. Is the contract from June 26 the latest?
04:24 < etgdfgfd> coi
04:25 < _mukti_> coi
04:27 < gleki> i'd like to copy most important pages into that backup website and our html/js apps
04:27 < gleki> like camxes.js, sutysisku
04:27 < _mukti_> I think poor Lorit is likely to be bewildered by all of that detail. I'm going to try to make things simpler for her.
04:29 < b_jonas> i ko'a me lo nalmuvdu jinme tubnu gi'a dasri gi'e bo dandu ri
04:32 < etgdfgfd> jgari grana ja garna
04:34 < b_jonas> je'e
04:51 < phma> mi puzi zvati le jupku'a
04:52 < phma> all what detail?
04:52 < _mukti_> The last email about the domain being down, etc.
04:54 < _mukti_> I will just serve as the main contact henceforth. Thank you for doing the legwork of setting everything up!
04:55 < phma> The latest version has my phone number and Lojbab's address. She may not answer email till evening, so you may want to call her.
04:56 < _mukti_> I'm not going to wait. I'm going to print the contract, amend and sign it in my name, and then send it to her. If she wants to print out another version, I'll return that too, but this way at least she will have something in hand today.
04:57 < phma> ok
04:58 < _mukti_> I'll continue to CC you and Bob on all communications
05:00 < gleki> _mukti_: can you finally oblige organizers of logfests report on how they went? iotherwise it's a waste of time
05:01 < _mukti_> gleki: I agree that reports are useful, but they're not unprecedented ... banseljaj reported on the gathering he organized a couple of years ago
05:01 < banseljaj> Speaking of, I have the pictures and a bunch of video too.
05:02 < gleki> _mukti_: what in your opinion logfests are for? where are textbooks, dictionaries, fluent speakers that they produced? there are none
05:02 < banseljaj> I lack the skills to turn them into something presentable and would be willing to hand it over
05:02 < _mukti_> But yes, I agree that it would be valuable ... in organizing future events, it would be good to know what worked well, what didn't work, etc.
05:02 < gleki> it'd be much more helpful to send NooLearning to Germany of if he doesnt want then to me.
05:02 < _mukti_> gleki: I think there are intangibles. We're not meeting to draft a dictionary.
05:03 < banseljaj> gleki: Seeing as we are a very niche community (Someone once described lojbanists as the skinny nerd in the back that even the nerds pick on), Just the existence of logfests is great as it allows people to meet.
05:03 < gleki> banseljaj: why it's not  a waste of money and time in your opinion?
05:04 < banseljaj> Because otherwise you don't have an annual gathering and more people lose interest.
05:04 < gleki> banseljaj: have you tried once?
05:04 < gleki> prove your claim
05:04 < banseljaj> Theoretically,  you can say "we organized a dozen logfests" and people would not dig further.
05:04 < gleki> this is how i see it.
05:04 < banseljaj> Tried not having a logfest?
05:05 < gleki> yes
05:05 < gleki> people dont speak much lojban there. so no fluent speakers?
05:05 < gleki> then what are logfests for? to impress someone that lojban is alive?
05:05 < banseljaj> We have three fluent speakers, relatively
05:05 < gleki> well, not lojban but lojbanistan
05:05 < gleki> banseljaj: okay, how many of them taught new people speak lojban?
05:05 < banseljaj> gleki: Pretty much the primary purpose of any sorts of convention.
05:06 < gleki> banseljaj: whom have you impressed?
05:06 < banseljaj> I know two people who have taught extensively, both of them taught me. There's robin, who's teaching his daughters. bob taught a lot of people back in the day
05:06 < gleki> banseljaj: during logfests?
05:07 < banseljaj> Not during logfests
05:07 < gleki> banseljaj: who or what benefited during the logfest you were present at?
05:07 < _mukti_> I think part of the value of a gathering like this is that you don't know what is going to emerge from it. A single person may be inspired to do something as a result of it. Or people may form a bond which enables them to work on something else together. Etc.
05:07 < gleki> banseljaj: whom did you impress during or as the result of that logfest?
05:07 < banseljaj> We are *not* a structured or hierarchical community
05:07 < gleki> _mukti_: what did emerge as the result of past logfests?
05:08 < banseljaj> it'd be foolish to accept tangible goals like that.
05:08 < banseljaj> gleki: the CLL v1
05:08 < _mukti_> My understanding is that a lot of the language was designed at the early gatherings.
05:08 < gleki> I state that logfests, primarily last 3 logfests were a waste of time and money. Now prove me wrong.
05:08 < gleki> documentally
05:09 < gleki> My counterproposal: instead of a logfest spend some money on making selpa'i and NooLearning meet.
05:10 < gleki> he may not agree ofc, then his name can be replaced.
05:10 < banseljaj> gleki: Well I organized one of them. I can assure you that not much money was spent and it was generally a celebration of the 25 years we have had lojban for. We reflected on how we got there and what we should do moving forward
05:10 < gleki> banseljaj: why a skype conference couldnt be done forthat?
05:10 < banseljaj> gleki: Nope
05:11 < gleki> So my counterproposal goal: record the whole meeting, teach representatives of NooLearning basic Lojban, upload the recordings to the LLG
05:11 < gleki> audio would be enough
05:11 < _mukti_> gleki: I think you also have to factor in what people want to do.
05:11 < banseljaj> What is NooLearning?
05:12 < _mukti_> People want to meet. There's no indication, for example, that people want to teach representatives of NooLearning. If they do, great, let's talk about supporting that.
05:12 < gleki> banseljaj: just a random org. well, they want to create an e-learning tool
05:12 < _mukti_> There is, however, an indiction that people want to meet.
05:12 < gleki> _mukti_: if people want to meet then why?
05:12 < gleki> why should we support their desire?
05:13 < banseljaj> Uh. Because humans are wrired to meet others?
05:13 < _mukti_> Lojbanists meeting is consonant with the mission of LLG.
05:17 < _mukti_> Your question, gleki, provokes another question: Why should we support things that people don't desire?
05:17 < _mukti_> If you, for example, desire to teach representatives of NooLearning -- great! Put togeter a proposal and bring it to the Board!
05:18  * PrincessBecca tried organizing a washington toki pona meetup. ended up being her and one other person the first time. and the other person never came back
05:18 < samcinki> .oi dai
05:18 < _mukti_> ike
05:18 < PrincessBecca> je'e
05:20 < banseljaj> The thing is persistence, PrincessBecca
05:20 < banseljaj> I've had a lot of meetings where I was the only one or one of two peopl
05:21 < PrincessBecca> yeah probably. i
05:21 < PrincessBecca>  may have been i
05:21 < PrincessBecca> n over my head tryi
05:21 < PrincessBecca> ng to organi
05:21 < PrincessBecca> ze esperanto and toki pona at the same time
05:21 < PrincessBecca> ugh stupid keyboard
05:21 < PrincessBecca> i ended up just sticking with eo and neglecting toki pona
05:23  * nuzba @xeno_256: @kuina_ch 人工言語だけど、ロジバン(lojban)も主語を省略できて、空気を読む形での推測です。面白そうなので勉強中… [http://bit.ly/1Cd0EAL]
06:04 < noncomcinse> .i cipra
06:04 < noncomcinse> s/cipra/snada/
06:04 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: .i snada
06:04 < noncomcinse> s/snada/fliba/
06:04 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: .i fliba
06:05 < noncomcinse> s/fliba/mi kakne loka pilno za'ure'u ku pa notci/
06:05 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: .i mi kakne loka pilno za'ure'u ku pa notci
06:05 < noncomcinse> .i cipra cipra
06:06 < noncomcinse> s/cipra/snada/
06:06 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: .i snada cipra
06:06 < noncomcinse> .i cipra cipra
06:06 < noncomcinse> s/cipra/snada/g
06:06 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: .i snada snada
06:06 < noncomcinse> s/SNADA/cipra/
06:07 < noncomcinse> .i cipra cipra
06:07 < noncomcinse> s/cipra/snada/g
06:07 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: .i snada snada
06:07 < noncomcinse> s/SNADA/cipra/i
06:07 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: .i cipra snada
06:30 < gleki> phma: is noolearning coming?
06:31 < phma> afaik yes.
06:38 < phma> en: nabmi
06:38 < mensi> nabmi = x1 (event/state) is a problem to/encountered by x2 in situation/task/inquiry x3. |>>> Also: x1 requires
06:38 < mensi> consideration by x2.  See also preti, danfu, ciksi, jijnu, jinvi, nandu, pensi, sidbo, spuda, raktu. |>>>
06:38 < mensi> officialdata
06:39 < phma> en: danfu
06:39 < mensi> danfu = x1 is the answer/response/solution/[reply] to question/problem x2. |>>> (cf. ciksi, frati, preti, nabmi, spuda
06:39 < mensi> for agentive response/reply, cpedu) |>>> officialdata
06:40 < Zearen> .i coi ro jundi
06:41 < niftg> coi mi'e na'e banzu jundi
06:44 < gleki> Zearen: coi. have u upvoted at least 5 questions with rating below 10 here area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
06:47 < Zearen> .i na go'i .i mi na me la'e zoi gy. have an account gy.
06:47 < gleki> do se jaspu no da
06:47 < gleki> i e'u do zbasu lo jaspu
06:47 < Zearen> Beginnners:  Don't do what I just did ^^'
06:48 < gleki> gi'e zanru su'o mu lo preti
06:48 < gleki> for tatoeba.org interface i translated "account" as {jaspu}
06:48 < gleki> {lo jaspu} to be precise
06:51 < Zearen> vi'o
06:52 < Zearen> .i ta'o la vlasisku cu fliba do'e mi
06:52 < gleki> http://vrici.lojban.org/~gleki/mediawiki-1.19.2/extensions/ilmentufa/ircbot/naxle.html
06:52 < gleki> use this
06:53 < gleki> vrici.lojban.org/~gleki/mediawiki-1.19.2/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/index.html
06:53 < gleki> or this
06:56 < Zearen> .i ki'e .i mi ka'e tavla bau la .lojban. pi'o no valsi sorcu .iku'i lote kancu lo lojbo valsi poi jai se djuno mi cu cmalu
06:57 < gleki> sepi'o
06:57 < Zearen> .ie .u'u
06:57 < gleki> i lo te kancu be lo lojbo valsi li'o
06:59 < Zearen> za'a mi duske loni sutra
06:59 < gleki> dukse
06:59 < Zearen> si dukse
07:00 < gleki> jb: zildukse
07:00 < mensi> zildukse [< zi'o dukse ≈ Zi'o* dukse*] = zildukse — x1(entity)  is in excess, is too much for  x2(property of x1)  to
07:00 < mensi> take place(clause)''
07:00 < mensi> :lo zildukse — excess.
07:00 < mensi> :lo nu mi tatpi cu zildukse lo nu mi sidju do — I'm too tired to help you.
07:00 < mensi> :Related words: bancu, banzu, ricfu, zmadu
07:00 < Zearen> .oi puzu mi se lojbo
07:00 < gleki> do du'e va'e lo ka sutra
07:00 < gleki> i do ze'u na lojbo
07:00 < gleki> i puzuku do lojbo i babo do na lojbo
07:01 < Zearen> .i .oiru'e mi bazi na tavla
07:02 < gleki> do di'a lojbo vau i'e
07:02 < gleki> i ta'o xu do na co'u morji tu'a zoi gy. area15.gy.
07:03 < Zearen> .i na go'i .i la'e zoi gy. area15 gy. mo
07:03 < gleki> http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
07:04 < Zearen> .ua zoi gy. area15 gy. nadu zoi gy. area51 gy.
07:05 < gleki> i oi se'i mi pu srera
07:37  * clakre wakes up this morning with "balnema" playing in head
07:38  * clakre realizes ze'a isn't terminated and is acting as a sumtcita.  Song suddenly makes more sense
07:38 < gleki> oh, seems like eng2jbo dictionary will be generated in one hour using livla.js. much better than infinite time using Google Spreadsheet :D
07:38 < clakre> u'i
07:38 < Zearen> Is there a «Lojban the Hard Way» equivalent that uses metaphors like "Imaginary journeys are best understood as modifications of inner selbri like other modals, hence «da ga'uvu zu'avi muvdu» can be understood as moving that's the a little to the left, and then the a-little-to-the-left-moving is far above.  I.e. each outer modal adds a segment creating a new selbri to the exiting imaginary journey of the inner selbri".
07:39 < gleki> clakre: have you upvoted 5 questions with rating below 10 here? pls do if you havent yet area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
07:39 < durka42> Zearen: heh, sounds like you should write one :)
07:39 < clakre> sorry, not a stackexchange member and haven't taken the time to become one yet...
07:39 < gleki> Zearen: sounds like Waves or CLL or Jonh Clofford
07:39 < gleki> *Clifford
07:39 < gleki> clakre: you may login
07:39 < Zearen> .i mi na banzu loni certu
07:40 < gleki> jb: banzu
07:40 < gleki> oh i see
07:41 < Zearen> Well, I actually got frustrated this way trying to understand something in the CLL.  It kept making metaphors to English which made it harder to understand.
07:42 < gleki> i know
07:42 <@xalbo> The intention of the Wave Lessons was to teach Lojban qua Lojban, although it does not infrequently try to relate things back to English.
07:43  * clakre is using the Wave Lessons
07:43  * clakre needs to get back to making them into an epub with the answers on their own pages at the back
07:43 < gleki> xalbo: that could be justified if it used real life examples. but it doesnt
07:43 < Zearen> Which is fair, the CLL is targeted to beginning speakers who haven't had their brains warped by the language yet.  I mean more of a strictly intermediate text.
07:44 < durka42> ie sarcu
07:44 < Zearen> Er, not targeted, but written as not to alienate beginners.
07:44 <@xalbo> I really should reread the Wave Lessons and work on improving them.
07:45 < durka42> mi'u
07:45 < gleki> ящ кфэщ уэг
07:45 < gleki> zo ra'o e'u
07:45 < PrincessBecca> omg @ "nasa" off the new lojban rap album... when he starts spitting in toki pona
07:45 < durka42> actually I don't think I've read them the first time .o'anai
07:45 < gleki> i zo mi'u pe do malgli
07:45 < durka42> PrincessBecca: .i'i
07:46 < Zearen> .i ki'u ma doi gleki
07:47 < gleki> mo ki'u makau
07:48 <@xalbo> ma ve jinvi lo du'u malgli vau zo'ei zo mi'u do doi la gleki
07:48 < Zearen> zo mi'u pe la durka malgli
07:48 < gleki> *cu
07:49 < durka42> da'i ca'iku .ei mi cusku lu mi ji'a li'u
07:49 < gleki> BPFK cu xusra lo du'u lu mi'unai li'u srana lo si'o anfora
07:49 < gleki> i mi tugni
07:49 < gleki> i plixau
07:49 < gleki> jb: mi'u
07:49 < gleki> y
07:50 < gleki> jb: mi'u
07:50 < gleki> za'a gau mi spofu
07:52 <@xalbo> I can't find any reference to {mi'unai} in CLL, although maybe I'm looking in the wrong place. All I find is ““mi'u”, adds a parallel case to the previous argument, and can also be used in tables or the like to show that something is being repeated from the previous column. It is distinct from “go'i” (of selma'o GOhA, discussed in Chapter 7), which is a non-discursive version of “ditto” that explicitly repeats the claim of the previous
07:52 <@xalbo> bridi.”
07:52 <@xalbo> http://lojban.github.io/cll/13/12/
07:52 < gleki> but it doesnt act like {ra'o}
07:52 < gleki> it doesnt update references to the current speaker
07:53 < gleki> at least this is what all should agree i suppose
07:53 <@xalbo> Huh, http://lojban.org seems to be down.
07:55 < gleki> you are the last person to notice that
07:55 < gleki> http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:PNH-ay9A7GoJ:mw.lojban.org/papri/BPFK_Section:_Highlight_Discursives+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ru
07:55 < gleki> mi'u ^
07:57  * nuzba @fotono: lo #lojban zantufa tricu cu milxe banro .i .uo.uo co'osai ma'oi SA http://guskant.github.io/gerna_cipra/zantufa_farvi.svg [http://bit.ly/1LKjjqt]
08:00 < gleki> i think it's not thr right time to test updates tomensi
08:00 < Zearen> zo anfora ki'a
08:00 < durka42> anaphora
08:02 < gleki> jb: mi'u
08:02 < mensi> mi'u = mi'u [interjection] — ditto (the same thing) — another one
08:02 < mensi> :mi pu zukte ra mi'u — I did the same thing.
08:02 < mensi> :mi pu lebna lo cukta gi'e dunda lo cukta mi'u nai la Alis — I took a book and gave another one to Alice.
08:02 < mensi> :Related words: mintu, bi'u nai, le, ri, ra
08:02 < durka42> mi'u bi'u
08:03 < gleki> bi'u is different
08:03 < gleki> jb: bi'u
08:03 < mensi> bi'u = bi'u [interjection] — newly introduced information, bi'u nai — previously introduced
08:03 < mensi> information
08:03 < mensi> :lo bi'u nai nixli pu klama lo panka i bi'u ny ca tavla lo nanla bu'u py — That girl (mentioned earlier), she went to a
08:03 < mensi> park. What is new is that she is talking to a boy there.
08:03 < mensi> :Related words: cnino
08:03 < Zearen> I forget, is there a NOI that's like an editor's correction, e.g. "The governer was quoted saying, '[The police] have recently been criticized for...'"
08:04 < ctefaho> you mean parenthesis? to-toi if so
08:04 < durka42> there is a TO with an automatic sa'a
08:04 < durka42> I forget what it is
08:04 < durka42> to'i?
08:04 < durka42> vlaste: to'i
08:04 < vlaste> to'i = open editorial unquote (within a quote); contains grammatical text; mark with editorial insert.
08:05 < durka42> to'i = to sa'a
08:05 < Zearen> Oh !  That's it.
08:05 < gleki> le turni pu se sitna fi lo smuni be lu ... li'u
08:06 < Zearen> zo «sa'a» cu pu jai sisku mi
08:06 < durka42> sesisku*
08:06 < ctefaho> yeah to'i
08:06 < Zearen> .y. .ie
08:08 < Zearen> .i za'a mi nitcu lonu lonu mi lojbo cu zmadu fi loni cafne
08:09 < Zearen> .iku'i lonu gunka cu co'e
08:13 < Zearen> .i mi pu djica lonu cusku «lu zo mi'u pe la durka sa'a cu malgli li'u»
08:17  * nuzba @garydale: Fiction: At the GruntWerx Board of Directors Meeting:  http://bit.ly/1IRyUON #lojban [http://bit.ly/1H3yoPA]
08:18 < Ilmen> za'a la lojbo kibystu za'o spofu ju pofpo'u
08:21 < Ilmen> .i mi kucli lo ka ki'u ce na jmina su voi cnino je cu zifre zmadu lo ka'e jai gau .akti be di'a bei fai la lojbo kibystu
08:21 < Ilmen> *kei
08:21 < Ilmen> s/zmadu/zmadu kei
08:22 < fenki> Ilmen meant to say: .i mi kucli lo ka ki'u ce na jmina su voi cnino je cu zifre zmadu kei lo ka'e jai gau .akti be di'a bei fai la lojbo kibystu
08:22 < Zearen> .uo pofpo'u .i za'a mutce sai loka spofu
08:23 < zipcpi> pofpofpofpofpofpofpo'u
08:23 < Ilmen> to .a'o lo mi banklecekitauvoisu na jminandu dukse toi
08:23 < zipcpi> spo'o'o'o'o'o'ofu
08:24 < Ilmen> spirofu spofu
08:24 < zipcpi> coi menli
08:24 < Ilmen> ta'o nai zo'o nai ki'u ma na jmina lo cnino lo ka'e gasnu be lo nu di'a selfu
08:25 < zipcpi> doi ma
08:25 < Ilmen> doi kaidji be loka spusku .u'i
08:26 < zipcpi> mi na sanji lo drata selfu
08:26 < rlpowell> site's back up
08:26 < zipcpi> ui
08:26 < Ilmen> .i'o
08:26 < zipcpi> mupa cnino valsi ku oi
08:28 < Ilmen> doi ro da poi pu denpa .i lo kibystu ba'o xruti
08:30 < zipcpi> "DBD::Pg::db do failed: ERROR: null value in column "natlangwordid" violates not-null constraint
08:30 < zipcpi> DETAIL: Failing row contains (null, 66867, 0). at /srv/jbovlaste/current/dict/editdef.html line 171."
08:32 < zipcpi> ... having difficulty adding gloss words to my word cause of this error
08:32 < Ilmen> la jbovlaste su mikce cu nitcu
08:32 < zipcpi> u'i
08:33 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/sumdai
08:34 < samcinki> basically {bu'a}
08:34 < zipcpi> Maybe... but I don't know what {bu'a} means when used metalinguistically :p
08:35 < Ilmen> bu'a = me'au da
08:35 < Ilmen> so basically "satisfy at least one predicate
08:35 < Ilmen> "
08:36 < Ilmen> which seems somewhat tautological
08:36  * zipcpi nods
08:37 < Ilmen> Reminds me of the Toaq Dzu predicate "x1 is anything"
08:37 < zipcpi> I guess that's why almost no one uses it lol
08:38 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/iolpe Slate coming
08:39 < Ilmen> .u'i
08:39 < zipcpi> iol - unspecified marital status, ios - married (thought of a set for unmarried, but I don't know how useful it'd be [married set is for recognizing one as part of their own family], and I don't know what they should look like)
08:39 < zipcpi> na - nanmu, ni - ninmu, pe - prenu
08:40 < zipcpi> iocre is Dr/Prof
08:41 < Ilmen> je'e
08:41 < Ilmen> ni'o mi de'a jundi
08:53 < cliva> ki'e doi gasnu be lo nu la jbovlaste cu se pagbu lo xunterjo'e
08:54 < zipcpi> ie zabna
08:57 < cliva> (to ba'a ja'ai pei lo nu setca zo xunterjo'e la jbovlaste cu rinka lo vilti'a toi)
08:57 < zipcpi> vilti'a ma u'i
08:57 < durka42> lo xunterjo'e cu mo
08:58 < zipcpi> xunre samterjo'e
08:58 < cliva> redli'inki
08:58 < zipcpi> .y. kibyterjo'e
08:58 < durka42> ua
08:58 < durka42> mi gasnu .o'a
08:59 < cliva> .ei pu ba'e zu se pagbu .i ku'i zabna ja'a ku
09:00 < cliva> .i ta'o ru'e ga'a do ma ni lo ka fanva tu'a lo jbovlaste sazycimde lo jbobau cu nandu
09:02 < zipcpi> uo http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/iocre
09:02 < durka42> ua
09:02 < durka42> .ai mi bazu .iocre
09:03 < ldlework> ua
09:04 < ldlework> yoshreh durka
09:05 < durka42> zipcpi: pei da terbri jecu srana lo se tadni
09:06 < zipcpi> xy'y .ie pilxau ka'e
09:06 < gleki> where is toaqzdu's dict. and how to use this "anything" brivla?
09:07 < zipcpi> $x_1$ is a Dr./Prof. (honorific for achieving a certain level of education or knowledge in field $x_2$), recognized by $x_3$
09:07 < zipcpi> ?
09:08 < zipcpi> Not sure if it's better to put the more useful place in x2, or keep consistency with the rest of the slate
09:08 < cliva> gleki: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pyR0DkYVnjTWtmdibSHPKr-k7MQRMBerBzL7WfpKjkM/edit?pli=1#gid=0 (to laldo sai ku'i toi)
09:08 < gleki> "recognized by" - i dont think it's a popular approach these days due to incosistency of place structures. compare melbi2
09:09 < zipcpi> Yeah...
09:09 < gleki> we are moving into guaspi
09:09 < zipcpi> u'i
09:09 < gleki> ti itku'ile si melbi ga'a mi
09:10 < ldlework> gleki: I think recognized by is in an inherent aspect to doctorial status though
09:10 < gleki> cliva: ba'anairu'e i ki'e
09:10 < gleki> ldlework: it's inherent to many many concepts
09:10 < ldlework> Not really
09:10 < gleki> that lack this place
09:10 < ldlework> Certification is intrinsically defined by some external authority
09:11 < gleki> i just perceive this place as "by standard", only a bit narrower in semantic range
09:11 < ldlework> Mere association with some approving entity isn't the same
09:11 < gleki> ca'i
09:12 < ldlework> better remove cinmo3
09:12 < ldlework> since you have sera'a
09:12 < ldlework> I imagine many things will be deleted by sera'a
09:12 < ldlework> let's get started
09:12 < gleki> jb: cinmo
09:12 < mensi> cinmo = cinmo — x1(entity)  feels emotion  x2(property of x1)  about  x3(entity)
09:12 < mensi> :lo cinmo — emotional (live being). lo se cinmo — emotion, feeling (impression).
09:12 < mensi> :mi cinmo lo ka gleki vau lo nu mi'o simxu tavla bau la Lojban — I feel happy that we talk in Lojban.
09:12 < mensi> :Related words: cumla, jilra, nelci, xendo, ckeji, cortu, jgira, kecti, kufra, marvele, prami, steba, zungi, badri,
09:12 < mensi> burna, gleki
09:12 < gleki> no idea how to remove it
09:12 < ldlework> sera'a
09:13 < gleki> neither sera'a nor ne sera'a seem be working here
09:13 < ldlework> right. of course not.
09:13 < gleki> what should i attach sera'a to?
09:13 < ldlework> but ca'i is a justified replacement for the authority in the act of certification
09:13 < gleki> to cinmo2?
09:13 < ldlework> gleki: whatever you'd fill x3?
09:13 < ldlework> what? I explicitly said cinmo3
09:13 < ldlework> nevermind, gleki
09:13 < gleki> i mean how to use this sera'a instead of cinmo3
09:14 < gleki> 09:12 < ldlework> better remove cinmo3
09:14 < gleki> how?
09:14 < Zearen> I think having a place that is typically unfilled is the same is assuming it's zo'e and not zi'o.  I.e. iocre typically has a governing or approving body assumed, and fi zi'o would seem odd.
09:14 < ldlework> in the same exact sense that you would remove iocre2
09:14 < ldlework> Zearen: exactly
09:14 < Zearen> Same thing with cinmo3, actually
09:14 < zipcpi> It's iocre3 now
09:14 < gleki> i ithink for iocre ma'i or ca'i is fine
09:15 < gleki> en: nolraitru
09:15 < mensi> nolraitru [< nobli traji turni ≈ Noble superlative govern] = t1=n1 is a regent/monarch of t2 by standard n2. |>>> Cf.
09:15 < ldlework> Zearen: sure, I only suggested cinmo3 to point out silly gleki's position on iocre is
09:15 < mensi> nobli, traji, turni, balnoltru, noltruni'u, noltrunau, noltroni'u, noltronau, nolse'u, nolkansa, gugja'a, truralju. |>>>
09:15 < mensi> arj
09:15 < ldlework> I don't think we should actually remove cinmo3
09:15 < gleki> en: nobli
09:15 < mensi> nobli = x1 is noble/aristocratic/elite/high-born/titled in/under culture/society/standard x2. |>>> Also upper-class;
09:15 < mensi> high/low, upper/lower are poor Lojban metaphors; note x2 standard applies when the title/nobility is not recognized
09:15 < mensi> culture/society wide; this would include self-assumed titles.  See also banli. |>>>
09:15 < mensi> officialdata
09:15 < Zearen> I mean, you still can use those if you want.  I use tavla bau ... instead of tavla fo all the time because it's more explicit.
09:15 < ldlework> Zearen: also it seems like its ben a looooooooong time since I've seen you
09:16 < Zearen> It has :p  I've been working, burnt out, and now I'm feeling like a human again.
09:16 < ldlework> fi'i lo tolcliva
09:16 < ldlework> Zearen: I'm not sure how its more explicit though
09:17 < ldlework> It seems perfectly arbitrary and dependent on style rather than semantic
09:17 < ldlework> that said, I prefer a heavy tag style too
09:17 < zipcpi> Just easier for a reader to pick out without having to remember what {lo ve tavla} is
09:17 < ldlework> ie
09:17 < Zearen> Er, "explicit" is not the best word.  It gives more hints to a human reader who may not have memorized that many places of tavla.
09:17 < Zearen> .ie
09:18 < ldlework> :)
09:18 < ldlework> Zearen: I'm glad to hear you're on an upswing.
09:19 < zipcpi> All the honorific slate has a recognition place; my reasoning is to be able to render things like "A gentleman always keeps his word"
09:19 < Zearen> .i doi cadgu'a xu do ca ka'e tavla bau la .lojban. po'o
09:19 < durka42> zipcpi: how's that use the x2
09:20 < zipcpi> Implicit zo'e
09:20 <@xalbo> Yeah, to me a degree always has a granting institution, that's an intrinsic part of what a degree *is*. If it's not granted by a particular institution, it isn't a degree, it's a piece of paper (and often, not even that).
09:20 < zipcpi> I mean I imagine liars and cheats get called "mister/sir" all the time, but in that sentence the speaker is expressing an opinion on what *he* considers to be worthy of that title
09:20 < durka42> je'e
09:21 < durka42> hmm so then we need "an elephant (status recognized by x2) never forgets"
09:21 < durka42> zo'o
09:21 < zipcpi> u'i
09:21 < ldlework> .i doi zy. mi ka'e go'i du'i tu'a lo'e jbopre
09:22 < zipcpi> u'i
09:22 < durka42> I agree with xalbo but if these words are just honorifics we don't need to bloat them with places. you can always use another selbri to ask "doctor of what according to whom?"
09:22 < ldlework> Why have multi-place predicates at all then?
09:22 < ldlework> Where does the valuation stand?
09:23  * durka42 cu binxo lo taksi
09:23 < Zearen> Well, the above could easily be «mu'i lodu'u da .iople kei, da ze'e nupre lo zasti»
09:23 < zipcpi> iolpe
09:23 < Zearen> Actually, to "keep ones word" is a little trickier to translate
09:24 < zipcpi> Hmm... yeah
09:24 < zipcpi> gasnu ro lo nupre be ri?
09:24 < zipcpi> Er se nupre
09:25 < Zearen> na go'i
09:25 < Zearen> upre = x1 (agent) promises/commits/assures/threatens x2 (event/state) to x3 [beneficiary/victim].
09:25 < zipcpi> Yeah... it's an event, so usable for gasnu2
09:26 < Zearen> Oh, NVM, I missed your translation, I thought you were correcting mine.
09:27 < zipcpi> ua
09:27 < Zearen> If I could replace any place with a modal, I'd replace all these agent places with gau -_-
09:27 < Zearen> *especially* for kancu
09:28 < zipcpi> kancu... dunno though. Does gau mean *make* it that number, or does it just mean "count"?
09:28 < Zearen> Though I suppose a promiser is intrinsic in the relationship of a promise.
09:28 <@xalbo> You think?
09:29 < zipcpi> I think zilkancu might be better rendered as {meirlai} or something
09:29 < zipcpi> {memlai}
09:30 <@xalbo> meirmei
09:30 < zipcpi> That's usable too, just thought that {klani} is useful here
09:30 < Zearen> Hmm, that's a good question.  a model like kancu fi'o facki da would be better.  I just found the x1 place of kancu more of a hinderance than a help.
09:33 < ldlework> xalbo: lol
09:33 < ldlework> zipcpi: there's a whole chapter on promises in Speech Acts
09:33 < ldlework> Its the first illocutionary force he analyzes in full
09:33 < zipcpi> Right
09:34 < Zearen> Oh right, mei.  I ta'e forget about «mei»...
09:34 < ldlework> Zearen: have you heard selpahi's full album Za'o?
09:35 < Zearen> na go'i
09:35 < ldlework> ko'oi sai
09:36 < ldlework> Zearen: also we have a 3D virtual lojbanistan now
09:36 < ldlework> If you ever want to hop on I can help get you setup
09:36 < Zearen> .ua.uo
09:36 < Zearen> .i go'i sai
09:37 < ldlework> camxes: la zearen ku
09:37 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "z" found.
09:37 < ldlework> Zearen: send me a lojban name and a password and I'll set up an account
09:37 < ldlework> Has anyone logged onto jbogu'e lately? Is it still running?
09:37 < ldlework> I was getting pretty bad lag the last couple times I logged in
09:37 < Zearen> la'o xy. zearen xy.
09:38 < Zearen> camxes: la'o xy. zearen xy.
09:38 < camxes> ([la'o xy xy] VAU)
09:38 < ldlework> Zearen: can't have such spaces and such, easier if you have a preferred lojbanification of your name
09:39 < ldlework> not even dots work :(
09:39 < Zearen> Oh, my lojbanified name is la .ziren.
09:39 < ldlework> okay pm me a password
09:40 < ldlework> Zearen: you'll need a client, everyone seems to like Singularity Viewer
09:40 < zipcpi> ... why did ilmen write an alternative definition for {zilkancu}? Looks like he misplaced something meant for another word
09:41 < Zearen> ge'e la'o gy. second life gy. co'e
09:41 < ldlework> doi ziren zo'ei do ca se zbasu
09:41 < ldlework> Zearen: yeah but its private, its not on actual secondlife
09:41 < ldlework> It runs on the opensource OpenSim
09:42 < ldlework> So it runs a lot nicer and its all about lojban
09:42 < zipcpi> Made {memlai} a synonym of {zilkancu}
09:42 < Zearen> .i lo mi pamoi nu jmive cu banzu loni nandu
09:42 < ldlework> but yeah same tech essentially
09:43 < ldlework> Zearen: that's fine. its for enjoying lojban in a spatial place so you can stretch your vocabulary legs
09:43 < ldlework> We have some neat lojban 'toys' in there too
09:44 < ldlework> I'm hoping to eventually encourage some structured roleplay too
09:44 < ldlework> And get some people to play lojban primtionary
09:45 < Zearen> .i je'e .i mi terpa tu'a la'o gy. Second Life gy. noi drata
09:45 < ldlework> Zearen: you can ask some of the others who have vistied whether or not it is terpa inducing
09:46 < zipcpi> It's not part of the Second Life thingy itself; just runs off the same engine
09:46 < ldlework> Its a small island, some lojban toys, a sky, and not much else.
09:46 < ldlework> Some hidden lojbo pendos
09:47 < ldlework> Zearen: in anycase your account is setup so if you get the client you can connect to http://sim.ldlework.com:9000
09:48  * ldlework cu sisku su'o ckafi
09:51 < Ilmen> "... why did ilmen write an alternative definition for {zilkancu}? Looks like he misplaced something meant for another word" -- What do you mean, Zipcpi?
09:52 < zipcpi> "x1 (plural) is such that x2 (number) of its members satisfy the property x3" is quite different to "x1 numbers/adds up to/consists of x2 (number) counting by units x3; x1 are x2 in number."
09:52 < ldlework> coi Ilmen
09:54 < Ilmen> zipcpi: Please elaborate.
09:54 < Ilmen> .e'o sa'ulnaisku
09:54 < zipcpi> units x3 is rather different from "satisfy the property x3", pe'i
09:55 < Ilmen> People used to say things like "lo xanto cu zilkancu li ci lo re xanto", which is weird to me
09:55 < zipcpi> I don't even know oll
09:56 < Ilmen> How would you use {zilkancu}, as you understand it from its definition?
09:56 < zipcpi> I dunno; I tend to ignore the x3
09:57 < zipcpi> 2 apples -> lo re plise -> lo plise poi zilkancu li re
09:57 < zipcpi> I have no idea what should go into x3
09:57 < zipcpi> But to me your definition could be {lo plise poi zilkancu li re lo ka xunre}
09:58 < Ilmen> How would you say "I'm counting the red apples in this pile of apples"?
09:58 < zipcpi> But you are actually pointing to a bunch of apples, 2 of which are red...
09:58 < zipcpi> kancu isn't defined by property either
09:59 < Ilmen> en: kanji
09:59 < mensi> kanji = x1 calculates/reckons/computes x2 [value (ni)/state] from data x3 by process x4. |>>> See also kancu, jdice,
09:59 < mensi> skami. |>>> officialdata
09:59 < zipcpi> mi kancu lo xunre poi cmima lei po'uti plise
10:00 < zipcpi> Or lei'i, jo'au gadganzu
10:01 < zipcpi> Yeah no idea what goes into x3, but I'd imagine it's important for those cases where a "unit" might be less well defined
10:02 < Ilmen> en: memkai
10:02 < mensi> memkai [< mei ckaji ≈ Cardinal selbri feature] = x1 is/are x2 (li) in number, and are among x3 |>>> This definition is
10:02 < mensi> based on the BPFK definition of mei. See also mei. |>>> Ilmen
10:02 < zipcpi> oi... and I just defined memlai
10:03 < zipcpi> Too many synonyms
10:05 < durka42> see? search before you reinvent words :)
10:05 < zipcpi> I will never learn my lesson
10:05 < ldlework> someone should kansa Zearen who is vitke la jbogu'e for the pamoi
10:05 < zipcpi> Never
10:06 < ldlework> akmnlrse: ki'e
10:08 < zipcpi> mi kancu lo xunre me le'i plise
10:10 < zipcpi> ldlework: ta'o {re'u} means "for the nth time"
10:13 < akmnlrse> ldlework: je'u simlu lo ka snomau lo jai purci
10:13 < gleki> en:snomau
10:13 < mensi> [< masno zmadu ≈ Slow more] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
10:13 < mensi> snomau[5847], snozma[5858], snozmadu[7897], masnymau[7997], masnyzma[8008], ...
10:16 < zipcpi> mi pu pensi lo snime remtai
10:17 < zipcpi> mi se malglixlu
10:17 < akmnlrse> xe'e si .u'i
10:17 < gleki> mi ca'o snada favgau lo zmiku be loka zbasu lo vlaste poi traduki fe lo glico
10:18 < akmnlrse> .i si'a si'au la vlaji'u ku poi ctuca fo lo canlu valsi cu spofu (to pa lo jvinu no roi canci toi)
10:19 < gleki> en: vlaji'u
10:19 < mensi> [< valsi jvinu ≈ Word view] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
10:19 < mensi> vlavin[5878], valvin[5898], vlaji'u[6367], valji'u[6387], vlajvinu[7897], ...
10:20 < gleki> akmnlrse: xu itku'ile
10:20 < akmnlrse> cmene lo pa dacti klesi ne la jbogu'e
10:20 < gleki> je'e
10:20 < zipcpi> u'i ma finti zo kresi'e
10:20 < akmnlrse> .i skicu lo lojbo jufra se pi'o lo virtuuale dacti
10:21 < akmnlrse> ... ma smuni .i ma srana lo kerfa gi'e snime
10:21 < zipcpi> dandruff
10:21 < akmnlrse> ua
10:21 < zipcpi> za'a la .totus. cu finti
10:23 < xunlohu> coi la gleki
10:23 < gleki> xunlohu: coi i xu do co'i zanru su'e mu lo preti pe la'o StackExchange
10:23 < gleki> sisi
10:23 < gleki> la'oi StackExchange
10:24 < xunlohu> go'i na
10:24 < xunlohu> .u'u
10:25 < gleki> xunlohu: xu do ba zanru
10:25 < xunlohu> Um
10:25 < xunlohu> I misunderstand
10:25 < xunlohu> Understood
10:25 < xunlohu> Sorry
10:25 < gleki> area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
10:26 < xunlohu> I'm not on stack exchange
10:26 < xunlohu> I did see it, I'll sign up when I have Wi-Fi
10:26 < gleki> just login and upvote five questions with rating below 10
10:26 < ldlework> akmnlrse: I can restart the whole server if you'd like
10:26 < gleki> Zearen: will you register there and upvote questions too?
10:27 < Zearen> I have. .i ji'a mi pu finti lo preti
10:27 < xunlohu> I'll do so, gleki. Like I said, I'll do it when I get Wi-Fi to sign up for it on
10:28 < gleki> Zearen: so im marking you as upvoted 5 questions, right?
10:28 < zipcpi> Hmm... looks like someone already defined {samki'o} for 1024
10:28 < Zearen> Teah.
10:28 < Zearen> *Yeah.
10:29 < gleki> ok
10:29 < Zearen> relki'o might be better.  1024 isn't only for computers :)
10:29 < zipcpi> Not sure about extensibility though
10:29 < akmnlrse> ldlework: na sarcu (to ba'a ba ze'a ku no da pilno (to ge'e toi) toi)
10:29 < zipcpi> True... though I came up with my own slate of zi'evla too
10:30 < ldlework> akmnlrse: yeah
10:30 < zipcpi> ki'orbi me'orbi gi'orbi te'orbi pe'orbi xe'orbi ze'orbi go'orbi
10:30 < zipcpi> And then using them to make informal "rafsi", kirbi- merbi- etc
10:30 < zipcpi> e.g. kirbibaitni, kirbibitri
10:31 < zipcpi> bitri will be a new gismu for "bit"
10:31 < gleki> like if there was an old one
10:32 < gleki> loglan: bithi
10:32 < mensi> bithi = B measures C in bit/binary digit (s) default 1.
10:32 < akmnlrse> 10.8)  lo ratcu cu cmalu .iku'i lu'i ri barda
10:32 < akmnlrse> cu'u CLL .i xu ja'ai ca da drani fa di'u
10:33 < gleki> uanai
10:33 < durka42> zipcpi: what happened to bitsi?
10:33 < gleki> jbo: lu'i
10:33 < mensi> lu'i = [LAhE] sumgadri le se li'erla'i sumti le du'u sinxa le selcmi be ro ri .e no drata |>>> selcmi sumgadri; ce; la'i,
10:33 < mensi> le'i, lo'i |>>> xorxes
10:33 < durka42> vlaste: bitsi (fapro)
10:33 < vlaste> zo bitsi gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo bitsi gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
10:33 < durka42> vlaste: bitri (fapro)
10:33 < vlaste> zo bitri gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo bitri gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
10:34 < gleki> i suppose bitsi was used by me at some point
10:34 < zipcpi> durka42: gleki wanted it to be bitri, because he thought bitsi sounded too much like pizza lol
10:34 < durka42> fair
10:34 < durka42> though {bitri} is dyslexically close to {birti}
10:34 < zipcpi> u'i
10:34 < akmnlrse> da'i nibli lo du'u pu tu'a la xorlo lu'u ji'a sai la iolpe broda cu zasti
10:35 < gleki> and {bitni} to "beatnik"
10:36 < zipcpi> Erm, better decide before I enter 40+ words lol
10:36  * akmnlrse cu zmanei ru'e zo bitsi
10:36 < zipcpi> mi ji'a go'i
10:37 < gleki> the earliest mentioning of bitsi is from february 2015 by cirko.
10:37 < gleki> but by hat time it was already {bitri} in la bangu
10:37 < gleki> *tht
10:37 < akmnlrse> ue
10:37 < zipcpi> When I discovered it in la bangu it was bitsi
10:37 < akmnlrse> .i ba'a nai ru'e su'o lojbo proga cu se pagbu zo bitsi
10:38 < gleki> i cant see it in logs earlier!
10:38 < gleki> en: bitsi
10:38 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
10:38 < gleki> oh tatoeba probably
10:38 < akmnlrse> cumki
10:38 < akmnlrse> Tatoeba: bitsi
10:38 < mensi> no da se tolcri
10:39 < gleki> no
10:39 < gleki> okay someone erased our memory
10:39 < akmnlrse> da
10:40 < akmnlrse>    se
10:40 < akmnlrse>       tolcri
10:40  * zipcpi hides his MIB co'e
10:40  * akmnlrse to'o bajra soi se fanta lo nu Z di'a tolmipri le co'e
10:41 < zipcpi> u'i
10:41 <@xalbo> lo .itsi bitsi jukni cu cpare lo djacu tolrinci
10:42 < akmnlrse> na nabmi .i lo bitsi cu cmacma .i ja'o mapti sai
10:54 < Zearen> What's with this recent trend of using reduplication for 'tce' ?
10:55 < zipcpi> I've only seen it with brabra, cmacma
10:55 < zipcpi> And perhaps tcetce, but that's justifiable
10:55 < zipcpi> And I think it's as old as dirt
10:56 < Zearen> Yeah, tcetce makes sense.  But also, pofpo'u earlier.
10:56 < zipcpi> Oh right lol
10:56 < zipcpi> I think that wasn't serious
10:56 <@Broca> It's not recent; I'm pretty sure it was common when I discovered Lojban 18 years ago :-)
10:56 < gleki> it's strange.
10:56 < gleki> en: cmacma
10:56 < mensi> cmacma [< cmalu cmalu ≈ Small small] = c1 is tiny/miniature/diminutive/very small in property c2 with criterion c3. |>>>
10:56 < mensi> Cf. cmalu, cmalu, cmacai, ruble, toltce; antonyms: brabra, tcebra. |>>> brtais
10:56 < akmnlrse> s/cmacma/cma'alu
10:56 < fenki> akmnlrse meant to say: na nabmi .i lo bitsi cu cma'alu .i ja'o mapti sai
10:56 < gleki> how is it gonna expand?
10:56 < Zearen> It's just interesting to see Lojban evolve lije a natlang would
10:56 < akmnlrse> xu mabla mleca
10:57 < zipcpi> I dunno... I guess if you stretch it... ko'a barda lo ka barda lo ka co'e
10:57 < gleki> cmalu lo ka cmalu? then it's not tiny at all
10:57 < zipcpi> lol
10:58 < zipcpi> barda je barda
10:58 < Zearen> I mean, I suppose small-type-of-small makes sense.
10:58 < zipcpi> cmalu je cmalu
10:58 < gleki> although probably cmalu is about physical size only
10:58 < Zearen> I.e. the tanru
10:59 < zipcpi> Or maybe barda xoi zi'o karbi ke'a lo barda
10:59 < gleki> jb: tcemi
10:59 < akmnlrse> barda ma'i lo du'u lo barda cu cmalu
11:00 < zipcpi> Oh wait barda has a fi place
11:00 < zipcpi> barda fi lo barda
11:00 < zipcpi> barda fi lo'e barda
11:01 < gleki> jb: tcemi
11:01 < mensi> tcemi = tcemi — x1(entity)  is compared with  x2(entity)
11:01 < mensi> :mi poi tcemi do barda — I am big compared to you.
11:01 < mensi> :Related words: zmadu
11:01 < gleki> i stole that from ceqli
11:01 < zipcpi> ku'i se ni'udzau
11:01 < gleki> a truncated karbi
11:02 < gleki> im reluctant to stealing anything unless people need words
11:02 < gleki> so im not going to import the whole toaqdzu into this dict.
11:03 < zipcpi> zo tcemi ca dzaunlai li ni'upa
11:06 < gleki> oh i almost finished creating a script of eng2jbo dictionary
11:07 < gleki> zipcpi: ua i ja'o so'i da mutce xebni le valsi
11:08 < zipcpi> je'u
11:08 < durka42> bu'u la jbovlaste lo remei cu so'imei iau uinai
11:09 < durka42> sei mi stace mi ji'a na nelci
11:09 < mensi> ji'a mi mutce nelci i ie
11:09 < durka42> ko mrobi'o bu'u lo fagri doi zmiku
11:10 < zipcpi> u'i
11:10 < gleki> btw Japanese FrameNet added new frames that ... English FrameNet needs too!
11:10 < gleki> but some are interesting
11:11 < gleki> e.g. "to be distributed",i.e. non agentive "to distribute"
11:11 < durka42> .au lo do besna lo terdi cu me'au zoi gy to be distributed gy
11:12 < durka42> zo'o
11:15 < gleki> http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/1053_Paper.pdf
11:15 < gleki> The intransitive
11:15 < gleki> verb tiru ‘get scattered’ in (1a) is an inchoative verb used
11:15 < gleki> to describe particles or small objects falling. It is difficult
11:15 < gleki> to find a semantic frame in the current FN database with
11:15 < gleki> the meaning. As for the morphologically-related transitive
11:15 < gleki> counterpart tirasu ‘scatter’ in (1b), on the other hand, we
11:15 < gleki> assume that the Dispersal frame is involved, since the
11:15 < gleki> corresponding English verb scatter evokes the
11:15 < gleki> Dispersal frame (defined in FN as “an AGENT or a
11:15 < gleki> CAUSE disperses or scatters INDIVIDUALS from the
11:15 < gleki> SOURCE, a relatively confined space, to a the GOAL_AREA,
11:15 < gleki> a broader space”). 
11:15 < gleki> en: fatri
11:15 < mensi> fatri = x1 is distributed/allotted/allocated/shared among x2 with shares/portions x3; (x2/x3 fa'u). |>>> Also spread,
11:15 < mensi> shared out, apportioned; agentive distribution (= fairgau, fairzu'e).  See also cmavo list fa'u, fendi, preja, katna,
11:15 < mensi> tcana. |>>> officialdata
11:22 < zipcpi> xu lau'e zbusufukai zo'u: bau la tcekitau iau ca'e zo cei simbasti zo cu'i
11:22 < zipcpi> exp: xu ti zbusufukai zo'u broda
11:22 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
11:23 < zipcpi> oi zo zo'u naka'e co'e lo bridi
11:23 < zipcpi> xu lau'e zbusufukai tu'e
11:23 < durka42> mi stidi zo .i
11:24 < zipcpi> ie ka'e ji'a
11:24 < niftg> sumsmi porsi sepli bo cmavo vau ju'o cu'i
11:25 < niftg> xu da za'e brismi .a'u cu'i vau ta'o ju'i cu'i
11:27  * nuzba @464161niftg: za'e kairji'i lo jbobau lo ka sruri pandi bangu [http://bit.ly/1gd6GqY]
11:28 < durka42> lo jbobau cu me lai .lisp. xu
11:28 < zipcpi> simlu lo ka go'i iau u'i
11:29 < zipcpi> .y. me'ei go'i
11:30 < zipcpi> lu zi'o simlu li'u ju'ocu'i oi
11:31 < akmnlrse> zo jetmlu ka'e basti
11:31 < zipcpi> ie
11:32 < zipcpi> doi cirko do'u pei go'oi cei
11:32 < niftg> .ua zo jbobau ji'a jai se sisku la nuzba
11:33 < zipcpi> mi ja'a za'o pilno zo cei .iku'i la'a na pavyslakycmavy'inda
11:33 < akmnlrse> zo cei zo'u mi na pante
11:33 < akmnlrse> doi lo zipcpi
11:33 < zipcpi> zo lo .i mi ja'a zipcpi xoi se ca'engau
11:34 < akmnlrse> verdikala ja'a~~~~~i
11:34 < zipcpi> u'i
11:34  * akmnlrse bregause'i lo ka se darxi lo jai crori'a
11:34 < ldlework> oi mi cortu lo mi birka
11:35 < akmnlrse> coi zi'o
11:35 < ldlework> heh I like how the first result for searching for "stress" is "krtis"
11:35 < akmnlrse> .u'i
11:37 < Zearen> .i .u'i ta'o lo mi danlu bambola cu se cmene o zipcpi .imu'ibo mi se cfipu lonu zo'e cusku le cmene
11:37 < durka42> vlaste: krtis (n)
11:37 < vlaste> krtis (notes) = Perhaps unfortunately, the stress of the Lojbanized name falls on the final syllable ("tis"); this version enunciates the /t/, rather than reducing it to a tap.
11:37 < durka42> hmm
11:37 < durka42> is that true?
11:37 < zipcpi> mi ji'a ponse lo zipcpi bambola
11:37 < durka42> the rules are in conflict
11:38 < akmnlrse> je'u mi ta'e bacru do'e zo'oi kr,tìs
11:38 < durka42> you should stress the second-to-last syllable, but you can't stress a syllabic r
11:38 < durka42> je'e
11:38 < durka42> ai mi ningau lo mi slaka samtutci
11:38 < durka42> ji'a zo .kyrtis. da'i mo
11:38 < zipcpi> mu'i ma paunai na pilno zo .kyrtis.
11:39 < akmnlrse> pe'i dunli (to ku'i .ei lo drata cu spuda toi)
11:39 < zipcpi> pe'i ra'a lo'e cmevla le se basna slaka na rinju
11:40 < durka42> ie
11:41 < durka42> $ ./camxes.py -t syllable krtis
11:41 < durka42> "kr,TIS"
11:42 < akmnlrse> ba zu ma lo do tutci co'a gubni
11:44  * nuzba @uitki: ce ki tau jau - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ce_ki_tau_jau by Spheniscine [http://bit.ly/1GRocaI]
11:45 < durka42> la lujvo cu jimca lo se .urli be la'oi github.com/durka/camxes-py
11:45 < zipcpi> exp: la'oi github.com/durka/camxes-py
11:45 < mensi> ([{la'oi ~} {py BOI}] VAU)
11:45 < zipcpi> .y. oi
11:45 < durka42> ....
11:45 < zipcpi> za'a mi pofygau da
11:45 < durka42> exp: mi-do-xebni
11:45 < mensi> ([mi do] [CU {xebni VAU}])
11:45 < durka42> ua
11:45 < durka42> did you spoff the preprocessor
11:46 < ldlework> u'i
11:46 < zipcpi> I just brought up to Gleki of an idea to make the hyphen an allograph for the space
11:46 < zipcpi> So that I can connect strongly related brivla with cmavo, e.g. tsali-sai
11:46 < durka42> well, it's not like la'oi is formalizable anyway
11:47 < durka42> exp: la'oi .mi-do.
11:47 < mensi> ([{la'oi ~} do] VAU)
11:47 < zipcpi> I think la'oi should ignore my zbusufukai reform though
11:47 < zipcpi> I was actually testing for the period, not the hyphen
11:48 < durka42> well, AFAIK the la'oi parsing is done by the parser
11:48 < durka42> but the special character replacements are done by regexes before the parser is even run
11:48 < durka42> exp: mi?do?xebni
11:48 < mensi> ([mi do] [CU {xebni VAU}])
11:48 < durka42> exp: la'oi brok?en
11:48 < mensi> ([la'oi ~] VAU)
11:48 < zipcpi> Hm
11:48 < durka42> huh, maybe not
11:48 < durka42> exp: la'oi brok-en
11:48 < mensi> ([la'oi ~] [CU {en VAU}])
11:48 < zipcpi> exp: mi.do.xebni
11:48 < mensi> ([mi do] [CU {xebni VAU}])
11:48 < durka42> why are those different
11:49 < zipcpi> exp: la'oi mi.do.xebni
11:49 < mensi> ([la'oi ~] VAU)
11:51 < durka42> dots are definitely handled by the grammar itself
11:51 < zipcpi> Yeah so "all we have to do" is make the hyphen be treated like the dot or the question mark
11:52 < zipcpi> Nothing could go wrong, right?
11:53 < zipcpi> to mi sefsi dapsku toi
11:53 < gleki> i dont even know whether la'oi should eat dots or not. i consider it an edge case
11:54 < durka42> vlaste: la'oi
11:54 < vlaste> la'oi = single-word non-Lojban name; quotes a single non-Lojban word delimited by pauses and treats it as a name
11:54 < durka42> xm
11:54 < durka42> I thought it said spaces in writing
11:54 < durka42> vlaste: zo'oi
11:54 < vlaste> zo'oi = quote next non-Lojban word only; quotes a single non-Lojban word delimited by pauses (in speech) or whitespace (in writing)
11:54 < durka42> yeah
11:54 < durka42> they are the same selma'o
11:54 < durka42> so...
11:55 < gleki> so what is the solution to detri system?
11:55 < gleki> li cy xi pa ce li my xi reno?
11:55 < durka42> zipcpi's lerfu :)
11:55 < zipcpi> Erm, right now my solution is li'ei
11:55 < gleki> you mean mixed number/lerfu?
11:55 < zipcpi> But, experimental selma'o and all that
11:55 < gleki> li'ei is superstrange. one cmavo only to handle detri1?
11:56 < durka42> not just for detri1
11:56 < zipcpi> No. it's also useful for addresses, passwords, etc
11:56 < zipcpi> license plates
11:56 < zipcpi> Anything where there are arbitrary mixed letters and numbers
11:56 < gleki> i dont even understand what this xorxe's change would solve.
11:56 < durka42> exactly
11:56 < durka42> well actually it's not hard to understand
11:57 < gleki> still {re boi remoi}
11:57 < durka42> it would solve {abu za'u re'u co'e} and that's it
11:57 < zipcpi> Anyway li'ei can actually be easily implemented, at least if we want to do it quickly. Just make it shorthand for {li pe'o joi'i}
11:57 < gleki> {abu za'u re'u co'e} is a imstake similar to {lo mlatu pinxe}
11:58 < zipcpi> Well, from my point of view, the problem is that it's hard to remember both that za'u is grammatically identical to pa, and that it attaches to a letter before it
11:58 < zipcpi> You see I actually support his proposal, except where it messes with LI...LOhO T.T
11:59 < gleki> looks like i need to rework my brivla system then
11:59 < zipcpi> Huh? Don't see how it affects brivla
11:59 < gleki> because it's impossible to finish CC then
11:59 < gleki> your endless rants
11:59 < gleki> they damage the language
11:59 < ldlework> What does attaching a letteral infront of za'u do?
12:00 < gleki> and make CC unfinishable
12:00 < durka42> camxes: abu za'u re'u co'e
12:00 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [oO] but "e" found.
12:00 < durka42> er
12:00 < zipcpi> My rants? I don't think I said anything about brivla
12:00 < durka42> ldlework: see, {abu za'u} combines into one lerfu string
12:00 < durka42> so it breaks
12:00 < durka42> camxes: abu boi za'u re'u co'e
12:00 < camxes> ([{<a bu> boi} CU] [{za'u re'u} co'e] VAU)
12:00 < gleki> yours and others' rants about how lerfu should work
12:00 < durka42> exp: abu za'u re'u co'e
12:00 < mensi> ([{a bu} BOI] [CU {<za'u re'u> co'e} VAU])
12:00 < zipcpi> gleki: I didn't start the fire
12:01 < gleki> i dont care who started
12:01 < gleki> wat if tomorrow i propose a brivla system and xorxes says "i think brivla should be killed"
12:01 < ldlework> what
12:02 < zipcpi> ... I guess you're just not in the mood then...
12:02 < gleki> i cant finish CC because the language is changing
12:02 < durka42> ldlework: remember that lerfu strings can contain numbers, i.e. {li ry re dy re}
12:02 < durka42> ldlework: the proposed reform is to change that, so they wouldn't combine
12:03 < durka42> gleki: stop being a drama queen .u'i
12:03 < durka42> all languages change
12:03 < dutchie> some faster than others
12:04 < zipcpi> I was against the part that made {li'ei}, {xi}, or other solutions necessary
12:04 < akmnlrse> camxes: za'u re'u co'e
12:04 < camxes> ([{za'u re'u} co'e] VAU)
12:04 < gleki> what was the vote then?
12:04 < zipcpi> I'm just sticking with {li'ei} because it's the "safest" solution as I see it
12:04 < ldlework> Usually the constructed ones that are incomplete who have communities full of linguists, logicians and language philosophers.
12:04 < durka42> I didn't see any vote yet
12:05 < zipcpi> And I'm not sure that {boi} thing, i.e. the actual useful part of xornunsep, would affect your materials that much
12:06  * ldlework ta'o jinga lo na srana ui sai
12:06 < ldlework> uo o'u
12:06 < zipcpi> Also I favor {li'ei} as a compromise because it only adds one syllable, and can be used for any arbitrary charstring
12:07 < zipcpi> No need to patch things together with xi, ce, or joi'i
12:08 < ldlework> I have just solved an insanely difficult systems engineering problem that has been plaguing my team for months
12:08 < zipcpi> So yeah I don't see how I'm to blame here
12:08 < ldlework> I can't wait until they get back from lunch
12:15 < zipcpi> Bah... the only reason that xornunsep wants to extend to LI... LOhO too is because of that darn mekso grammar, la'a
12:15 < ldlework> Complain to all the mathematicians using lojban
12:16 < zipcpi> ldlework: Oh, but even the mathematicians disagree; there's a page with a long rant saying that mekso should be ditched
12:16 < zipcpi> In favor of predicates
12:17 < zipcpi> http://teddyb.org/robin/tiki-index.php?page=Lojban,+Math,+mekso,+and+bridi+cmaci
12:21 < zipcpi> I mean, the mekso grammar is about as hard to learn as the rest of the language combined, it uses a bunch of unfamiliar cmavo, which represents acres of cmavo space...
12:21 < ldlework> No complaints here
12:21 < ldlework> Lojbanists should use the language of the field when working in the field.
12:22 < ldlework> No other language requries an "in-language" grammar for specialized fields.
12:22 < zipcpi> Maybe Ithkuil lol
12:22 < ldlework> Ithkuil has a mesko grammar too?
12:22 < zipcpi> Last I heard
12:22 < zipcpi> I don't know the details
12:23 < ldlework> I have to wonder how mesko falls under the purview of the language's goals.
12:23 < ldlework> Lojban that is.
12:23 < ldlework> Since mathematical forms are neither ambiguous or having anything to do with language in the first place.
12:23 < zipcpi> "about as hard to learn as the rest of the language combined" Oh and with less documentation too
12:24 < ldlework> And usage.
12:24 < zipcpi> Mhm
12:24 < ldlework> And active certus.
12:33 < Zearen> .i mi citka lo keisdiia noi kukte
12:34 < zipcpi> "mathematical forms are neither ambiguous" Erm, technically they are. "f(x)" can mean either the function f over x, or f*x
12:34 < zipcpi> Not to mention many, many letters are overloaded
12:35 < Zearen> Well, it actually fills a very important need:
12:35 < zipcpi> zo keisdiia ki'a
12:36 < Zearen> Turning written math into speech.  There are no languages that do this unambiguously
12:36 < zipcpi> Predicates can do that too
12:38 < zipcpi> li pano sumji li ny le ni'ai ke'a pilji li re li pai li xy :: "10 = n + (2 * pi * x)"
12:38 < zipcpi> ni'ai is just mathematical poi'i
12:38 < zipcpi> Makes it clear you expect a number
12:39 < Zearen> fu'ivla fo «zoi sy. quesadilla sy. » lo spano bangu
12:39 < zipcpi> ua
12:41 < Ilmen> ckaji la .kesadiĭas.
12:41 < Ilmen> -sd- isn't a permitted cluster
12:42 < Zearen> I don't think mekso is the best system for math, granted.  I also think it would be better served as a series of predicates, but it definitely fits in line with the languages goals.
12:42 < Zearen> Ah, right.  Is kesadiĭas vlatai ?
12:43 < Zearen> camxes lo kesadiias cu co'e
12:43 < durka42> ke sa di ias
12:44 < Zearen> ^ that's what I thought, and why I dropped the a.  (I forgot about voiced/unvoiced)
12:45 < Zearen> camxes: lo cidjrkeisadiia
12:45 < camxes> ([lo cidjrkeisadiia KU] VAU)
12:45 < Zearen> Oh, nvm, cmevla, I see.
12:47 < Zearen> la jbobau cu pluja tcetce
12:48 < ldlework> Why is being able to speak math part of the language's goals?
12:48 < ldlework> It just seems like a non-sequitur
12:48 < ldlework> Why not a grammar for speaking written music unambiguously?
12:50 < Zearen> Because you could just sign it, or some such.  Mathematics in commonly spoken in most modern languages of advanced cultures
12:51 < Zearen> s/sign/sing/
12:51 < fenki> Zearen meant to say: Because you could just sing it, or some such.  Mathematics in commonly spoken in most modern languages of advanced cultures
12:51 < Zearen> .ie
12:52 < ldlework> Zearen: you can sing a tune so accurately as to unambiguously transmit to me the information required to perform it or transcribe it?
12:52 < durka42> I mean it's one of the goals because it was one of the goals :p
12:52 < ldlework> Mathematics is commonly -described- in most modern languages
12:53 < ldlework> durka42: I meant why does it fall under the purview of the more general and fundamental goals
12:53 < ldlework> but u'i
12:53 < durka42> ie
12:53 < Zearen> Me ? No.  Someone who needed to ? Maybe
12:53 < zipcpi> in b4 bunch of cmavo to represent this unambiguously: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juggling_notation
12:53 < ldlework> zipcpi: indeed
12:53 < ldlework> zipcpi: you just _juggle_ the pattern
12:53 < ldlework> that's how you communicate the pattern to me
12:55 < zipcpi> Though I have somewhat wondered about "private use" cmavo space... or perhaps specialized lo'u ... le'u
12:55 < durka42> zipcpi: that notation is just digit strings :p
12:55 < durka42> ldlework: then you have to be able to juggle to talk about juggling
12:55 < ldlework> durka42: but its ambiguous that thos digit strings represent a juggling pattern
12:55 < ldlework> we need specific cmavo for it
12:55 < zipcpi> durka42: Yay lerfu tcita detri
12:56 < durka42> oh I misinterpreted
12:56 < durka42> that's only one cmavo, not a bunch though
12:56 < durka42> vlaste: juggle
12:56 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/juggle
12:56 < Zearen> Well, note above I think that mekso is overly complex and would be better represented lojbanically as a collection of... GOhA ?  or whatever the list for cmavo shaped brivla is.
12:56 < durka42> boo
12:56 < zipcpi> No just make a new magic brivla in the vein of detri
12:56 < durka42> za'e malbarizmo
12:57 < zipcpi> x1 (li'ei string) describes juggling pattern x2 under string interpretation system x3
12:57 < durka42> fu'ivla fu lo spano
12:57 < zipcpi> Done
12:57 < ldlework> u'i
12:57 < ldlework> Same thing can be used for any encoding system
12:58 < Zearen> But we should certainly be able to speak/describe/communicate math in Lojban.  Since it's Lojban, it should also be able to be done unambiguously.
12:58 < durka42> better to just say "li 414414414 mifra fi lo malbarizmo ciste"
12:58 < ldlework> Zearen: I do agree that if we went to a predicate system it shouldn't be trivialized, math is important of course.
12:58 < zipcpi> Zearen: That page already describes how to do it with predicates
12:58 < zipcpi> "How do Lojbanists do it?" <.<
12:59 < Zearen> Oh, I just saw "How can mekso be one of Lojban's goals" and I misunderstood.
13:00 < zipcpi> http://teddyb.org/robin/tiki-index.php?page=Lojban,+Math,+mekso,+and+bridi+cmaci
13:00 < durka42> lojbanists do it with a lot of unfilled places
13:00 < Zearen> I am in strong agreement that a whole new system of cmavo is less than useful.
13:00 < zipcpi> Lojbanists do it with broken light.
13:00 < Zearen> .u'i
13:01 < Zearen> The times I've felt like I wanted to arbitrarily use prefix notation, postfix notation, convert a predicate into a counter, etc. is basically never.
13:02 < zipcpi> There's no whole new system of cmavo on that page... I saw two. There were a few more but I'm not sure how they're supposed to be used yet
13:02 < zipcpi> And one of those two have some general usage (although right now most people use xoi for that kind of function)
13:03 < Zearen> Especially since you can just PA SELBRI.
13:03 < zipcpi> And that replaces all the bunch of cmavo for mekso
13:03 < Zearen> I was talking about the existing mekso cmavo :p
13:03 < zipcpi> Right
13:04 < ghhtzt> lojbanists do it if and only if they do it, under conditions x4
13:04 < zipcpi> with epistemology x5
13:05 < dutchie> u'isai
13:05  * ctefaho cringe cringe
13:05 < Zearen> The only things I might add as a mekso system is some stuff to make dealing with lambdas (via «ka»), e.g. a way to do folds and zips.
13:06 < dutchie> that sounds more like a computer science system than a maths one
13:06 < dutchie> the line is blurred of course
13:06 < Zearen> Then you could define su'i as x1 is the sum of x2 and x3
13:08 < zipcpi> We already have sumji
13:08 < Zearen> And define foldrai = x1 is the result of folding the binary property x2 over list/sequence x3
13:09 < zipcpi> I have no idea what that does, but that's exactly how great this is; just define predicates for what you need them to mean
13:09 < zipcpi> It's like OOP
13:09 < Zearen> dutchie: It probably is, but I think that's more useful here.
13:10 < Zearen> Or lambda calculus/functional programming.
13:10 < zipcpi> Mhm
13:10 < durka42> ie, foldrai would be nice :)
13:10 < Zearen> Oh. And a map
13:10 < durka42> then we could have a consistent definition for {sujysi'u}
13:11 < zipcpi> And hey you can even use my new rafsi -zam-... though cmacyzam is a bit long...
13:11 < durka42> when I complained that {sujysi'u} is wrong, xorxes said that {simxu} should be vague :/
13:11 < durka42> ie nai sai
13:11 < Zearen> This has an equal expressive power of mekso, if not more, and doesn't introduce new concepts.  You can use the Lojban you already know.
13:12 < durka42> ie
13:13 < Zearen> </rant>
13:14 < ghhtzt> hi, can someone teach me ithkuil
13:14 < dutchie> i'm not even sure if the annoyingly pedantic logical answer is yes zo'oru'e
13:14 < Zearen> .u'i
13:15 < durka42> ko cpedu fi la selpa'i
13:15 < durka42> la selpa'i cu .samyuan.
13:16 < zipcpi> So I still don't know whether I should use {bitri} or {bitsi}
13:16 < durka42> wait, in the future we might need a gismu for B-Trees
13:16 < durka42> zo'o
13:16 < zipcpi> lol
13:17 < Zearen> .i za'a lonu se .irci la'oi #lojban cu krinu lonu ctuca fi la .itku'il bau la .lojban.
13:17 < zipcpi> vlaste: bitni (gimka)
13:17 < vlaste> zo bitni gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo bitni gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
13:18 < zipcpi> gleki convinced me to change zbaiti to baitni
13:18 < zipcpi> But...
13:18 < ghhtzt> eho xu do ctuca mi la itkuhile
13:19 < dutchie> pe'i do nitcu zo tu'a
13:19 < ghhtzt> dojiha nitcu bahe tuha zo tuha
13:20 < durka42> .u'i
13:20 < zipcpi> Actually I think nitcu-2 doesn't need to be an abstraction
13:20 < dutchie> mi jinvi lodu'u zo nitcu na nitcu zo tu'a .iku'ibo mi kakne lonu srera
13:20 < Zearen> skamrbytri = x1 is a node of a B-tree with child list/sequence x2 with minimum number of children x3, maximum x4 and comparison function x5
13:21 < zipcpi> That doesn't work
13:21 < zipcpi> At least under current doctrine
13:21 < dutchie> my sentence or skamrbytri?
13:21 < durka42> no -y- in fu'ivla
13:21 < zipcpi> skamrbytri
13:21 < ghhtzt> zo itkuhile cmene loduhu lo itkuhilu cu mokau ijaho na sarcu fatuha zo tuha
13:21 < zipcpi> Also I'm allergic to type-3-fu'ivla lol
13:22 < durka42> sambiti
13:22 < zipcpi> k: sambitricu
13:22 < mensi> (CU [Z:sambitricu VAU])
13:22 < Zearen> .i lujvo
13:22 < zipcpi> k: sambiti
13:22 < mensi> (CU [Z:sambiti VAU])
13:22 < zipcpi> na lujvo
13:23 < dutchie> perhaps the word for byte should refer to eight in some way
13:23 < Zearen> camxes: lo samby.zeitricu
13:23 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "s" found.
13:23 < dutchie> bivka'u or something?
13:23 < ghhtzt> xahozasti
13:23 < zipcpi> dutchie: Well the first candidate was bivbitsi, but that ended up long when I wanted to attach prefixes to it
13:23 < Zearen> .i'e
13:24 < zipcpi> I mean {bivbi} is open, but xu gimy'inda
13:25 < dutchie> {bivjboka'u} even perhaps
13:25 < zipcpi> <.<
13:25 < dutchie> er, not jbo
13:25 < dutchie> whatever the rafsi for lojbo is
13:25 < dutchie> er, not that either
13:25 < zipcpi> It's already defined as bivjetka'u, but I'm not using that for my slate
13:25 < zipcpi> What's more it only has one place
13:26 < dutchie> what other places do you want?
13:26 < Zearen> logji = loj
13:26 < zipcpi> Well, match all the other unit brivla
13:26 < dutchie> oh right
13:26 < zipcpi> x1 is measured as x2 units
13:27 < ghhtzt> tihe zahu 5000 da itkuhile rafsi
13:27 < ctefaho> lojbo'y rafsi is best rafsi
13:27 < zipcpi> <.<
13:27 < ghhtzt> ijaho kona pante doilojbo
13:27  * ctefaho ducks
13:27 < zipcpi> I don't see why you want that when we already have four-letter rafsi
13:27 < ctefaho> I speak STT jbobau
13:27 < Zearen> In the great traditions of language, Lojban is the English name, and jbobau is the Lojban name
13:28 < ctefaho> I kinda nuked the 4-letter gismu rafsi from it
13:28 < Zearen> STT jbobau ?
13:28 < zipcpi> Yeah if STT jbobau is gonna be even more syllabic than official one, then leave me out of it
13:28 < ctefaho> SumTciTa'a
13:28 < ctefaho> it won't
13:28 < zipcpi> It will with all your broda'y nonsense
13:28 < ctefaho> I didn't say I nuked all rafsi
13:29 < ctefaho> that's Logbanu
13:29 < ctefaho> ...where rafsi kinda still exist as affixes
13:29 < zipcpi> Yes, just the ones that are the last resort of those poor rafsi-less gismu
13:29 < Zearen> argument tool writing ?
13:30 < ctefaho> Zearen: it is a dialect/fork/whatever you want to call it I am doing
13:30 < zipcpi> I don't see why you want to get rid of four-letter rafsi
13:30 < ghhtzt> i cannot find "rafsi" in the ithkuil ductionary. whats it mean
13:30 < ctefaho> zipcpi: think about it for more than 10 seconds
13:30 < zipcpi> ... still not seeing it
13:30 < ctefaho> keep thinking
13:31 < zipcpi> No, I've had years to think it through
13:32 < ctefaho> think harder
13:32 < ctefaho> harder better faster stronger
13:32 < zipcpi> This isn't going to work
13:32 < Zearen> Because when the join using an -y- hyphen, they're the same number of sounds anyway ?
13:32 < Zearen> *thry
13:32  * Zearen is not a very good typist
13:32 < zipcpi> No, gismy is two syllables, gismu'y is three
13:33 < Zearen> Wait, what ?
13:33 < Zearen> Why would you do that ?
13:33 < zipcpi> ctefaho: Is this really how you win an argument? Try to get me to read your mind?
13:33 < ctefaho> Zearen: thank the isomorphic morphology for that
13:33 < ghhtzt> doesnt it fall apart as gi smuhy
13:33 < ctefaho> zipcpi: you seem like a lost cause and I am not trying to win anything:)
13:34 < zipcpi> Then stop playing these stupid games
13:34 < ctefaho> I love playing games
13:34 < Zearen> That's... not a very nice thing to say.
13:34 < zipcpi> I'll mute you
13:34 < ctefaho> Zearen: he kinda endlessly complains about any ideas I have
13:35 < Zearen> Well, games are only fun if you have people to play them with.  Hence, it's counter productive to irritate your fellow players
13:35 < ctefaho> I am just pulling zipcpi's leg:)
13:35 < zipcpi> Zearen: You see how he tried to lure me into some mind game; saying that I'd see how wonderful his idea is if only I "thought about it"
13:36 < Zearen> I feel like I'm getting stuck in the middle of something stupid, so I'm going to ignore it.
13:36 < ghhtzt> bring forth arguments or dont waste each others time. now pls teach me. i dont understand ithkuils verbs
13:36 < zipcpi> I can't teach you Ithkuil
13:37 < ctefaho> why are you asking about ithkuil in a lojban channel?
13:37 < ghhtzt> i thought this was the right place.
13:37 < ctefaho> well if selpa'i was here maybe he could help, but I know of no other jbòpre doing ithkuil
13:39 < ghhtzt> ok sry
13:39 < ctefaho> What made you think Ithkuil and Lojban were similar? they are quite different to my knowledge
13:40 < ctefaho> no problem. someone might know
13:40 < ghhtzt> they are both made up and weird
13:40 < ctefaho> .u'i ja'a
13:40 < zipcpi> ctefaho: Thanks for letting me know you are adding nothing productive to the conversation. To the mute you go
13:41 < ctefaho> calm down man
13:41 < ghhtzt> and lojban is too easy. i need a challenge. someone said i should try ithkuil
13:41 < zipcpi> I don't suffer trolls
13:41 < Zearen> .i drata fi lo xokau mei poi tavla
13:41 < zipcpi> So shut up forever
13:42 < ghhtzt> frica filoka xokaumei fa lo se bangu becehu
13:42  * ctefaho sighs
13:42 < zipcpi> Muted
13:42 < Ilmen> ŭi nai nu to'e panpi
13:42 < ctefaho> coi Ilmen
13:42 < Zearen> I don't know, Lojban has a lot of depth and complexity.  itkuil is only more difficult because it's more obscure, so has less resources.
13:42 < dutchie> it's also younger
13:43 < ctefaho> to me Ithkuil seems complex in the wrong way
13:43 < zipcpi> I hate trolls and mind games
13:43 < ctefaho> the way it builds everything into the words
13:43 < Zearen> Er, yeah, frica
13:43 < ctefaho> the sumtcita are at least tweakable
13:44 < ctefaho> not saying Lojban is better than Ithkuil it was just the impression I got from studying its case system
13:44 < Zearen> Itkuil is an impressive  piece of work.  It's difficult due to its level of abstraction.
13:44 < Zearen> What's left to be proven is whether it's abstract in useful ways/
13:45 < ctefaho> indeed
13:45 < Zearen> I'm not sure comparing languages on a scale of goodness is ever productive.
13:45 < zipcpi> They're only good for being rendered into soap
13:45 < ctefaho> on a scale of usefulness then:)
13:46 < Zearen> I'd argue that on a scale of usefuness, **both** itkuil and Lojban rank pretty low :p
13:46 < dutchie> .ie.u'i
13:47 < ghhtzt> ithkuil cases are not much different from lojban sumtcita
13:47 < ctefaho> *cough* STT is trying to improve on that;o
13:48 < ctefaho> I think one of the biggest problems with jbobau is the unique rafsi system
13:48 < Zearen> Not the lack of vocab ?  Because that's what generally trips me up.
13:48 < ghhtzt> biggest problem is vocab
13:48 < ctefaho> because it makes an overwhelming majority of possible lujvo pretty much useless
13:48 < ctefaho> well
13:49 < ctefaho> the locked rafsi system is part of that
13:49 < samcinki> I wonder how content clauses (lodu'u...) work in Iþkuîl, provided something similar exists
13:49 < ctefaho> the idea I have is to ban 4-letter gismu rafsi so 'y always works
13:49 < ctefaho> and any word can be joined with 'y
13:49 < ctefaho> also
13:50 < Zearen> I remember latro'a making the point that lujvo are essentially a falled experiment, and that tacking an agglutinative system onto a system built around predicates doesn't make much sense
13:50 < dutchie> what does 'y offer over 4-letter rafsi?
13:50 < ctefaho> My solution: y can never be used to join words by removing a letter, 'y can always join any two lojban words, like zei
13:51 < ctefaho> any two lojban words ending in vowel
13:51 < Zearen> But for Ithkuil, which essentially is a fusional language builf around agglutination, it makes sense.
13:51 < zipcpi> Zearen: They're a useful mnemonic at least. Though the whole problem with -gau lujvo etc has caused some problems
13:51 < ctefaho> this also makes joining cmavo and brivla together a piece of cake
13:51 < zipcpi> But people still use them because it's easier than {jai gau broda fai}
13:51 < ctefaho> ko'yklama
13:52 < ctefaho> fa'ylo'ymlatu'yklama
13:52 < ctefaho> for 2 random examples
13:52 < durka42> that would not work under the current morphology
13:52 < ctefaho> correct
13:52 < ghhtzt> content clauses are made by using framed relation on a formative
13:52 < ctefaho> but in STT morphology it does
13:52 < durka42> ok
13:52 < Zearen> Well, I'd rather get rid of -gau lujvo and replace them with gau ... BRIVLA ...
13:53 < ctefaho> so for lujvo, any whole word is the only predictable rafsi of that word
13:53 < durka42> I see STT's jurisdiction has broadened beyond sumtcita and become ctefa'obau :)
13:53 < zipcpi> zearen: You're basically asking for something that can modify a predicate's place structure
13:53 < zipcpi> And... yeah right now we don't have any good solution for that
13:53 < ctefaho> eh perhaps
13:54 < ctefaho> I mostly desire to learn jbobau to think and cogitate in it
13:54 < durka42> zipcpi: what do you mean? gau ... BRIVLA ... is now
13:54 < Zearen> You mean like modals ?  Don't modals do that already ?  Isn't a "gau" a modal ?
13:54 < Zearen> ^
13:54 < ctefaho> Zearen: all modals are macros expanding into xoi-clauses
13:54 < ctefaho> in my world at least
13:54 < zipcpi> Zearen... yes... but like I said, people prefer brodygau over jai gau broda fa
13:54 < Zearen> o_O
13:54 < zipcpi> *fai
13:55 < durka42> there's three solutions
13:55 < ctefaho> .i gau mi do sipna -> .i do sipna xoi mi gasnu ke'a
13:55 < durka42> gau ko'a ko'e broda
13:55 < durka42> ko'a brodygau ko'e
13:55 < ctefaho> ke'a being the outer bridi, that is "do sipna"
13:55 < durka42> ko'a jai gau broda fai ko'e
13:55 < durka42> ctefaho: ie
13:55 < durka42> sa'enai
13:55 < ghhtzt> ikal tu = mi klama.  íkala tu = losuhu dahinai mi klama
13:56 < ctefaho> but as for STT, I am basically putting a whole bunch of ideas for improvement into it, mine and a few others
13:56 < Zearen> Well, there is something to be said for brevity...
13:56 < zipcpi> First one is basically "ergative case", or so gleki tells me, but it's difficult to form the forethought required for it, and it doesn't work with {jecu / gi'e} etc
13:56 < ctefaho> I also desire a logical language that is 100% formally expandable
13:57 < zipcpi> Third one is long and the {fai} often forgotten
13:57 < zipcpi> And so people resort to the lujvo option
13:57 < durka42> ah, I had my suspicions on how ghhtzt was, but now they are confirmed :)
13:57 < durka42> zipcpi: yeah and I don't see any problem with that to be honest
13:57 < ctefaho> as for STT's rafsi system, it essentially allows an exponential amount of semantics to be crammed into lujvo of 2 or 3 short rafsi
13:57 < zipcpi> The lujvo option?
13:58 < durka42> yeah
13:58 < zipcpi> The problem is that right now -gau lujvo are somewhat inconsistent
13:58 < durka42> I don't use the inconsistent ones
13:58 < ctefaho> at the expense of making lujvo word creation a bit less automatic process
13:58 < zipcpi> Some are actually more like {jai broda}
13:58 < Zearen> If a term appears before the after thought connective, then it is a term of every bridi.  So yes, it does work with gi'e
13:58 < ctefaho> the alternative is to do like sepla and fuse zi'evla and lujvo
13:58 < zipcpi> Zearen: What I mean is that the gau would stick to both predicates
13:59 < zipcpi> When often that is undesirable
13:59 < ctefaho> but I still believe there is something worth having in the gismu-rafsi-lujvo-zi'evla/fu'ivla system
13:59 < Zearen> Then put it in the tail.
13:59 < zipcpi> You usually put something in the x1 for a reason
13:59 < zipcpi> Because that is the "subject"; the sumti with the most emphasis placed on it
14:00 < Zearen> vau exists.
14:00 < ctefaho> I just don't think permanently allocated short rafsi is a viable long-term solution
14:00 < ghhtzt> wedding vau
14:00 < Zearen> Also, you can put more than one term in the bridi head.
14:00 < zipcpi> I'm not sure how vou works here... say you want to say: gau mi broda ko'a .i mi brode ko'e
14:00 < durka42> I think I'm the only lojbanist who likes the lujvo system
14:00 < durka42> zipcpi: ...then say that :p
14:01 < ctefaho> durka42: including the short rafsi allocation?
14:01 < zipcpi> Imagine that instead of mi
14:01 < zipcpi> You have a long thing... or you just want to connect the two sentences using gi'e
14:01 < Zearen> gau zo'e mi broda gi'e brode / mi broda gi'e brode vau gau zo
14:01 < Zearen> 'e
14:01 < durka42> ctefaho: they're not perfect but if the alternative is losing the lujvo-veljvo associations, I'll keep 'em
14:01 < zipcpi> Where did zo'e come from?
14:02 < ctefaho> durka42: well in my system they still sort of remain
14:02 < ghhtzt> broda gaumi koha gihe brode kohe fami
14:02 < durka42> zipcpi: anyway just move the gau-term to after the selbri
14:02 < Zearen> It
14:02 < ctefaho> short rafsi can't come from any word
14:02 < zipcpi> durka42: The problem here is that you want to raise the gau term to the x1, so that it can be the x1 of both bridi
14:03 < ctefaho> and in lujvo the rafsi will in its defs have the original gismu's traced
14:03 < zipcpi> jai is supposed to do that
14:03 < Zearen> It's just a nonce word used to show structure.  Here, I'll think up an actual example.
14:03 < durka42> zipcpi: eh? terms don't fill places
14:03 < zipcpi> ...
14:03 < zipcpi> I'm using the word term wrongly
14:03 < zipcpi> The gau sumti to the x2
14:03 < zipcpi> *x1
14:03 < durka42> zipcpi: {gau mi broda gi'e brode} it sticks to both selbri. {broda gau mi gi'e brode} only the first one
14:03 < ctefaho> and all existing brivla base luvjo you love and cherish can easily be brought along
14:03 < ctefaho> based*
14:03 < zipcpi> Then who brodes?
14:04 < zipcpi> Actually it's the x1 of broda
14:04 < durka42> the brodaer and brodeer are both unspecified
14:04 < ctefaho> zohepowah
14:04 < zipcpi> No, {broda gi'e brode} -> {zo'e broda gi'e brode} implies that they're the same zo'e
14:04 < durka42> okay, still unspecified though
14:05 < durka42> in both examples
14:05 < zipcpi> Yeah but it doesn't say what I wanted to say
14:05 < durka42> what do you want to say, .u'i
14:05 < durka42> welp
14:05 < dutchie> u'isai
14:05 < zipcpi> Oops
14:05 < zipcpi> gau mi broda ko'a .ije mi brode ko'e
14:06 < zipcpi> I want to make mi the subject of both sentences
14:06 < zipcpi> Both bridi
14:06 < Zearen> «gau lo te bilma mi kafke gi'e vamtu» / «mi kafke gi'e vamtu vau gau lo te bilma»
14:06 < durka42> ohh
14:06 < durka42> don't think you can do that without repeating {mi} or using {jai}
14:06 < zipcpi> Exactly my point
14:06 < ghhtzt> mijaigaubroda gihe brode
14:06 < zipcpi> Or... -gau lujvo
14:06 < durka42> or that
14:06 < ghhtzt> poihi
14:06 < Zearen> "The sickness caused me to cough and vomit."
14:07 < zipcpi> The most promising fix I've heard thus far is the two letter rafsi... they play in a morphological space that is currently unassigned
14:07 < Zearen> Though gau isn't right here unless the sickness is the descolada
14:07 < ghhtzt> le siknese purinka lenu mi kafke gihe vamtu
14:08 < zipcpi> And being unusual and nothing like current lujvo, signals that they serve a very special purpose, modifying the brivla in a very specific way
14:08 < Zearen> I.e. gau implies volition.
14:09 < zipcpi> So instead of relying on exactly how {zangau} play with each other
14:09 < zipcpi> We just define -yga to always have a single expansion
14:09 < durka42> that could work
14:10 < Zearen> Er, how about «gau mi lo selkei muvdu gi'e se sance» / «lo selkei muvdu gi'e se sance vau gau mi»
14:10 < durka42> mi nelci i ie mi nelci
14:10 < ctefaho> sounds like sort of what sepla is up to
14:10 < ctefaho> with his "affixes"
14:10 < ghhtzt> sei stace mi na mutce nelci
14:10 < Zearen> " I moved the toy and made it make noises"
14:10 < durka42> I think those are the same yes
14:10 < durka42> assuming you add the missing cu
14:11 < Zearen> Er, right.  Sorry, it's been awhile ^^'
14:11 < ghhtzt> uhasai nicte toldi co barda
14:12 < ctefaho> ...and that and some other things is what STT is about. leaving you to your talkings now:d
14:13 < Zearen> Note that if you just want "I moved the toy and it made noises", you could « lo selkei cu muvdu gau mi gi'e se sance»
14:14 < Zearen> I used to be really into the far out there proposals and tweaks, but at some point people start speaking some other language with Lojbanic vocab.
14:15 < Zearen> There's nothing wrong with that, it's just that maybe all Lojban proper needs is a little polish, not an entire revamp.
14:15 < durka42> ie
14:18 < ctefaho> agreed Zearen
14:18 < Ilmen> .oi glare fa lo nicte vacri
14:19 < Zearen> .i .iesai .i mi to'e nelci lo sance be lo rutni brife
14:20 < Ilmen> .i mi ŭunmo lo xabju be lo glatce bratca be'o noi la'a ca'o febvi
14:21 < dutchie> pe'i vi dukse glare ca lo donri
14:22 < Zearen> .uanaisaidai
14:22 < dutchie> .i ku'i la'a ze'i ranji
14:23 < Ilmen> la'a nai dai cimni jai ranji
14:23 < dutchie> u'i vi lo gligu'e bazi carvi
14:24 < zipcpi> bu'u
14:24 < Ilmen> .e'u capyju'i zo vi noi jitfa pendo
14:24 < Ilmen> .i ĭe zo bu'u mapti
14:24 < zipcpi> For some reason old materials really liked vi over bu'u
14:25 < dutchie> ah yes
14:25 < zipcpi> I hear it's Loglan influence
14:25 < Ilmen> ki'u su da lo laldo ve ctuca cu mutce co zmanei zo vi zo bu'u
14:25 < Ilmen> .i ti'e dai loglo malxlu
14:26 < zipcpi> ki'e
14:27 < Zearen> «su'u» ?
14:27 < Ilmen> su'o
14:27 < zipcpi> Oh... yeah that's a CKTJ reassignment... sometimes we use it informally
14:28 < zipcpi> Also made somewhat famous by ZA'O
14:28 < Ilmen> za'o seju xa'o misno
14:28 < Zearen> .i ji'a za'a zo laldo valsi cnino vau .i'e
14:29 < zipcpi> na mutce lo ka cnino .iku'i na'e krasi gismu
14:29 < Ilmen> seznafmlu ĭe dai fa lodu zo laldo cnino
14:29 < Zearen> .i mi puze'u na'e jundi la .lojban.
14:29 < zipcpi> je'e
14:30 < durka42> zipcpi: well people also used to think {vi} tagged a location. at some point it was clarified to tag a spatial distance
14:30 < durka42> like {iz}
14:30  * durka42 {zi} *
14:31 < Ilmen> sei jinto lo pe'ople si prenu pu ta'e jinvi lo du zo vi tcika lo stuzi sumti
14:31 < Ilmen> *tcita
14:32 < Zearen> The reason it used to be enouraged was because often people would translate English to Lojban word to word, and use bu'u as "at" which was very often wrong and they meant "vi"
14:32 < durka42> why is bu'u wrong for that
14:33 < Zearen> I.e. you're typically either "vi" or "ne'i" it
14:33 < durka42> ...using CLL-vi
14:34 < Zearen> There are other versions of "vi" ?
14:34 < zipcpi> Maybe they are being superpedantic and saying you can only "bu'u" something if you are actually overlapping it, or something like that
14:34 < durka42> well the CLL-vi is polysemous, look:
14:34 < durka42> vlaste: vi
14:34 < vlaste> vi = location tense distance: here at ... ; at or a very short/tiny distance from ...
14:34 < Zearen> I always thought bu'u was discouraged for the same reason "du" is.  You're rarely in the exact same place.
14:34 < durka42> ca'i BPFK, {vi} always tags a spatial distance so it's exactly like {zi}
14:34 < zipcpi> Zearen: Then what's the point of bu'u then? rofl
14:35 < Zearen> Iunno.  I just learned to roll with it.
14:35 < Zearen> I like this version much better, I was just giving historical context.
14:35 < zipcpi> Yeah
14:35 < durka42> je'e
14:36 < Ilmen> I think bu'u is about overlap (otherwise, we'd use ne'i).
14:36 < Zearen> ^
14:36 < zipcpi> OK then... am I overlapping Malaysia, the country, or my house?
14:36 < Zearen> I like bu'u ~= ca much better though.
14:36 < zipcpi> OK those can be both ne'i technically
14:37 < Ilmen> I think ne'i implies bu'u
14:37 < Ilmen> ie nai pei
14:37 < mensi> ba'e mi na tugni
14:37 < Ilmen> re'i smuske cretce no'u la mensi
14:37 < Ilmen> mi denpa tu'a lo do prije valsi
14:38 < zipcpi> But yeah it does make sense to reserve vi/va/vu for spatial proximity
14:38 < zipcpi> da xo'ibu'u da
14:39 < dutchie> mi ca'o cilre ui
14:39 < Ilmen> ta'o co'o ro do
14:39 < zipcpi> Heck even zvati was never this pedantic
14:39 < Zearen> .i ca'o
14:40 < Ilmen> Well maybe zvati allows x1 and x2 to not overlap but be close to each other, I dunno. But then we'd lack a word for spatial overlap
14:41 < Zearen> zvati was never the pendantic one.  stuzi is the pendantic one.
14:42 < zipcpi> Ilmen: Well, whether I am overlapping Malaysia or my house does kinda depends on interpretation
14:44 < Zearen> Well, even if we take bu'u = spatial ca, then we're talking about points if we're strict about it.  This seems useless though.
14:44 < zipcpi> Yeah...
14:45 < ghhtzt> ca doesnt imply points
14:45 < Ilmen> I tend to think of "ca/cabna" as time overlap
14:45 < zipcpi> Not to mention the common semi-metaphorical usage... due to... the Internet
14:45 < zipcpi> e.g. bu'u la jbovlaste or bu'u la uitkipediia
14:46 < Ilmen> .ai sipna
14:46 < Ilmen> co'o
14:46 < zipcpi> co'o
14:46 < dutchie> co'o
14:47 < Zearen> Hahaha, I still am afraid to use «fi'o se .irci ti» or to use «ti» talk about anything on IRC or especially about anything on the internet.
14:47 < Zearen> I...
14:48 < Ilmen> .a'o lo glare na'e dukse .e nai lo mabla toknu cu ckana fi do
14:48 < Zearen> «lo'u bu'u la jbovlaste le'u» zanru nakusai mi
14:48 < zipcpi> Zearen: Hm the demonstratives... to me the act of posting something somewhere is about equivalent as signaling it. It's a bit different from "These are the reasons I quit my job:" (la'edi'e / lau'e) in my opinion
14:49 < Zearen> .i co'o .ibu
14:49 < zipcpi> Zearen: Yeah maybe that's sketchy; we don't quite have an alternative for it though
14:49 < Zearen> fi'o
14:50 < zipcpi> The metaphor of websites being... sites... is pretty entrenched, not just in English
14:50 < Zearen> Lojban is pretty adamant at refusing antipatterns just because other natlangs do it.  It's part of its appeal.
14:50 < zipcpi> fi'o... part of the problem is always having to import the brivla. fi'o... kibystu? se irci?
14:50 < zipcpi> Yeah I see your point
14:51 < zipcpi> Just don't know what's the best soulition
14:52 < Zearen> I'd use fi'o kibystu personally.  Also, sometimes trying to find a modal that doesn't exist means you should probably just be using the predicate.
14:53 < zipcpi> Problem is wrapping the bridi as an afterthought
14:53 < ctefaho> xoi'oi'oi
14:53 < ctefaho> just put a predicate in xoi and you got your modal
14:53 < Zearen> Just because you'd express that with a preposition in English doesn't mean you use a modal in Lojban.
14:53 < zipcpi> Problem is that often you're already deep into a bridi before you realize you want to put it in something
14:53 < zipcpi> So there have been various solutions came up with over the years
14:54 < zipcpi> xoi
14:54 < zipcpi> gi'ei (proposed in an old blog somewhere, though I just added it{
14:54 < Zearen> There's also «.i» :p
14:55 < zipcpi> {.i lo nu go'i} seems a bit weak though; like you're making two statements
14:56 < Zearen> Well, you are.  If that really bugs you, then «.ijebo lonu go'i»
14:56  * zipcpi shrugs
14:56 < zipcpi> The thing is the point of sumtcita is to encapsulate the most common "bridi-wrapping" predicates
14:57 < zipcpi> So either we come up with some new cmavo to express kibystu, due to commonness, or we stretch the meaning of bu'u
14:57 < zipcpi> The problem is that the line blurs even more when talking about virtual 'places"
14:57 < Zearen> The original purpose is to add places to bridi.  Though what you said is probably how it's used today.
14:58 < zipcpi> Because at some level of the UD, those places "exist"
14:58 < zipcpi> And they have to, unless we want to add {virtu'aly-} to everything
14:59 < Zearen> (This is why you can do weird stuff like lo mlatu be bai zo'e)
14:59 < zipcpi> mi virtu'alycitka lo virtu'alyplise
15:02 < zipcpi> Yeah... that's just not gonna work
15:04 < zipcpi> Another problem with .i is that it doesn't work within a NU
15:04 < zipcpi> It will close off the NU
15:05 < zipcpi> There is another crazy cmavo for that... {ju'ei}
15:05 < dutchie> there is a crazy cmavo for everything
15:05 < zipcpi> Yeah I took a long hiatus too, I had to pick all this stuff up when I came back
15:05 < Zearen> I mean, at some point you should stop nesting and start a new thought any way.
15:07 < zipcpi> It doesn't even require  that much nesting... only any NU where you might want to express more than one bridi
15:07 < Zearen> Or just use fi'o :p
15:07 < zipcpi> fi'o has similar problems to tanru; it imports one specific place, but doesn't say how the bridi is related to it
15:08 < zipcpi> It's usable, for sure,
15:08 < zipcpi> But sometimes vague
15:08 < ctefaho> fi'o is trash use xoi or soi
15:09 < zipcpi> And cumbersome if you actually want to fill more than one place of the imported predicate
15:09 < Zearen> All modals are like that.  Also, your solution to fi'o is too vague is let's make bu'u more vague.
15:09 < ctefaho> or even kai'a/kai'i depending on your needs
15:09 < zipcpi> I know what you mean about bu'u
15:09 < Zearen> So I'm confused.
15:09 < zipcpi> But I'm not sure what the best solution is
15:10 < zipcpi> But even then... is confusion really possible?
15:10 < Zearen> ctefaho: I'll speak Lojban how I please as long as it's gendra and smudra
15:10 < ctefaho> are you serious zipcpi did you make kai'a one of your UIs
15:10 < ctefaho> how many words has zipcpi added?
15:10 < Zearen> Oh ! I thought of the best, obvious solution: «do'e» :p
15:10 < zipcpi> Hah
15:10 < ctefaho> OH MY GOD
15:10 < Zearen> I'm actually pretty serious about that though.
15:11 < ctefaho> is that a hundred words
15:11 < ctefaho> I think that's a hundred words
15:11 < zipcpi> Er, no, if we have to resort to that it might as well be a new sumtcita
15:12 < ctefaho> Zearen: http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/proprietor-fronting
15:12 < zipcpi> I mean I do use do'e, but if you're suggesting we use it for all kibystu... yeah don't think that's gonna work out well
15:12 < ctefaho> ^if xoi/soi wasn't what you were looking after
15:12 < ctefaho> maybe you even want new-voi
15:12 < ctefaho> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/new_voi
15:13 < ctefaho> Zearen: What is it you want to do exactly?
15:13 < Zearen> Well, if the context is sufficiently obvious to figure out bu'u la'oi http://, then context should be sufficient for do'e.  If it's not, fi'o kibystu still works.
15:14 < Zearen> ctefaho: "at/on <website>", e.g. "I found this on http://awesome.com/"
15:15 < dutchie> clicking that link is probably a bad idea
15:15 < ctefaho> bu'u zoi url http://awesome.com/
15:15 < dutchie> but i'm rather curious
15:15 < ctefaho> bu'u zoi url http://awesome.com/ url
15:15 < zipcpi> I mean if we really needed we could come up with something that works like pe'a, but specifically for {kibro}, but... I'm not sure that works out for things like MMORPGs
15:15 < dutchie> ok that was very disappointing
15:15 < ctefaho> if you want make that just zvati directly
15:15 < ctefaho> zoi url http://awesome.com/ url zvati
15:16 < ctefaho> throw in a pe'a if you must
15:17 < ctefaho> but I think zvati is fine
15:17 < zipcpi> "All modals are like that." Well there are actually attempts to formalize the current sumtcita
15:17 < ctefaho> it is a location in "cyberspace"
15:18 < zipcpi> And I think some of them might work
15:18 < zipcpi> Not sure about {ra'a} or some others though
15:18 < zipcpi> But the point is that they *could* be more specifically defined than just by their fi'o
15:19 < Zearen> I disagree that you can be «bu'u by.» unless you can also be «ga'u by»
15:19 < ctefaho> Zearen: think like this, what is it that you want to say?
15:19 < ctefaho> dutchie: what did you expect huh
15:19 < Zearen> Websites don't exist in space.
15:19 < zipcpi> What about MMORPGs then?
15:19 < dutchie> ctefaho: mostly malware
15:20 < ctefaho> Zearen: but they exist on servers physically located away from you
15:20 < ctefaho> the website name is just a way to get to them
15:20 < Zearen> I'd be very willing to use bu'u to talk about a character being bu'u a place in the game world, but the player (human) isn't in the game.  They're jorne it, or something..
15:21 < zipcpi> Hm
15:21 < Zearen> Except that a single webpage may have data from multiple physical servers.
15:21 < ctefaho> Zearen: bu'u is just zvati, zvati isn't ok with you?
15:21 < Zearen> **A website is not a place**
15:22 < Zearen> It's not.
15:22 < ctefaho> I kinda disagree having studied IT management
15:22 < ctefaho> they are very much physical locations
15:22 < Zearen> ...
15:23 < zipcpi> I dunno, I don't really have any more arguments to move forward with; I'd make a new modal myself, but I don't know how others would feel about it
15:23 < ctefaho> a website is data located on a physical server away from you
15:23 < ctefaho> there is no pe'a in that spatiality
15:23 < Zearen> I repeat my previous point: a single webpage may have data from multiple physical servers.
15:23 < zipcpi> I'd like to get some feedback from some other peolpe
15:23 < ctefaho> Zearen: how is that a problem when the url is the location?
15:24 < durka42> lo mutpapri na zvati pe'i
15:24 < durka42> s/zvati/selzva
15:24 < fenki> durka42 meant to say: lo mutpapri na selzva pe'i
15:24 < Zearen> zipcpi: Well, ki'o is taken.  What about xi'o ? :p
15:24 < Zearen> I still think do'e is sufficient though.
15:24 < zipcpi> There's always ki'oi or something
15:24 < ctefaho> hmm good question
15:25 < Zearen> The URL is not a location in space..  You cannot be left of it.
15:25 < ctefaho> maybe stuzi is the better modal then
15:25 < ctefaho> or verb
15:26 < ctefaho> durka42: Good question. There is the URL and there is what is at the URL, right?
15:26 < ctefaho> the url and the content of the webpage
15:26 < ctefaho> iepei?
15:26 < mensi> ba'e mi na tugni
15:26 < durka42> right
15:26 < ctefaho> So I believe the url would be where something is located at
15:27 < VegBerg> It's not a physical place, although it may be an abstract place.
15:27 < zipcpi> Or even something like zai'o, but that relies on the CKTJ reassignment of bu'u to zai to make mnemonic sense
15:27 < durka42> coi la .vegberg.
15:27 < ctefaho> So then the url is zvati-1, and the webpage zvati-2?
15:27 < ctefaho> err
15:27 < durka42> ctefaho: I'd rather say the URL is a handle/reference to something
15:27 < ctefaho> other way
15:28 < ctefaho> Url is zvati-2, webage zvati-1
15:28 < Zearen> What is CKTJ ?
15:28 < VegBerg> coi la .durka42
15:28 < durka42> Zearen: one of those tweaks you used to be a fan of :) http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ce_ki_tau_jau
15:28 < ctefaho> Zearen: some cmavo reshuffling
15:28 < ctefaho> to save syllables
15:28 < Zearen> Oh, u'i
15:28 < ctefaho> more used cmavo gets shorter forms
15:28 < Zearen> I never thought anyone would seriously do that !
15:29 < ctefaho> durka42: well an url is just a name for an ip
15:29 < dutchie> (and a bit more)
15:29 < ctefaho> and the ip is like a road address
15:29 < durka42> sure
15:29 < Zearen> urli = x1 is the URL/address of web page/resource/file x2
15:29 < ctefaho> where you stop and pick up your data
15:29 < ctefaho> except the only thing moving is the data
15:29 < durka42> a road address isn't a place either
15:29 < durka42> I mean when expressed as a number or text
15:29 < ctefaho> right
15:30 < Zearen> So a URL is .urli and the content is se .urli
15:30 < durka42> the URL is an identifier
15:30 < ctefaho> but what is at the address, is a place
15:30 < ctefaho> yeah
15:30 < durka42> yeah I guess so
15:30 < durka42> not a useful place though pe'i
15:30 < durka42> since it might be in Robin's basement or a cloud server in Korea, who knows
15:30 < dutchie> or cares?
15:30 < ctefaho> "The image" zvati "www.imgur.com"
15:30 < durka42> and it may move to a different cloud server tomorrow
15:31 < durka42> it seems like a huge misuse of {zvati}
15:31 < dutchie> or maybe you get it from a different server from me
15:31 < ctefaho> I think zvati works fine
15:31 < Zearen> And "I logged in at http://example.com" is most exactly « mi jorne fi'o .urli zo'oi http://example.com»
15:33 < durka42> .u'u .ei mi cliva iau co'o
15:33 < ctefaho> co'o
15:33 < Zearen> I also highly disagree with the use of zvati.  It seems tcetce mutce lo ni  maltce mutce malgi
15:33 < Zearen> .i co'o
15:33 < ctefaho> your choice Zearen
15:34 < Zearen> *malgli
15:34 < ctefaho> use a simple brivla or a heavily complicated construct, you choose:)
15:35 < ctefaho> if you do believe I won't understand you if you use zvati
15:36 < zipcpi> Oh wait, forgot, zai'o is taken by some... well, there's this guy who's somewhat infamous for defining weird cmavo, but some might put me in that category as well
15:37 < Zearen> Haha, the one swap I wanted the most ce <-> fi'o isn't on there.  These choices seem better though.
15:37  * ctefaho has defined 4 UI cmavo in total
15:38 < Zearen> Well, the first 5 anyway.  The others seem like your typical proposal craziness.
15:38 < zipcpi> fi'o might be able to get foi, though I dunno if someone wanted that for something else
15:39 < ctefaho> Zearen: Do you truly believe I won't understand you if you use bu'u/zvati?
15:41 < Zearen> No.  I also think the reason you'll understand me is because you speak English, hence why its malgli.
15:41 < Zearen> *it's
15:42 < Zearen> Especially since I think you'll understand me also if I use do'e/.urli
15:42 < ctefaho> if you accused me of having English as a first language you can enjoy, cause I am not a native speaker of it
15:42 < Zearen> Clearly you speak it, and that's all I meant.
15:43 < ctefaho> then you mean mabla natlang
15:43 < Zearen> Whatever, it's not the point.
15:43  * ctefaho concedes
15:44 < Zearen> ?
15:44 < ctefaho> over-complicate lojban as much as you want, it won't do any good
15:44 < ctefaho> I am going to go practice my jbo-handwriting before I go to sleep, co'o
15:44 < dutchie> co'o
15:44 < Zearen> .y.
15:45 < Zearen> co'o .i pluka sevna
15:45 < demize> s/vn/nv/?
15:45 < Zearen> .ua .ie .u'u
15:50  * nuzba @earthtopus: @kukkurovaca ...and that the sentence made a lot more sense in the original Lojban [http://bit.ly/1T8RGss]
15:52 < demize> mi mutce tatpi .iku'i dukse glare
15:55 < demize> lo ti kumfa cu jacke'o du'eda
15:56 < Zearen> .uinaidai
16:07 < Zearen> Is there a may to attach a mo'i to a tense tag, e.g. mo'ivi la .djak. lo mlatu cu smaji klama
16:14 < zipcpi> exp: mo'ivi la .djak. lo mlatu cu smaji klama
16:14 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "k" found.
16:14 < zipcpi> exp: mo'iga'o la .djak. lo mlatu cu smaji klama
16:14 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "k" found.
16:14 < zipcpi> mo'iga'u la .djak. lo mlatu cu smaji klama
16:14 < zipcpi> Ugh
16:14 < zipcpi> exp: mo'iga'u la .djak. lo mlatu cu smaji klama
16:14 < mensi> ([{<mo'i ga'u> <la djak KU>} {lo mlatu KU}] [cu {smaji klama} VAU])
16:15 < zipcpi> Hmm... the tags are supposed to all have the same grammar in exp, but apparently it wasn't completely merged
16:15 < zipcpi> But I'm not exactly sure what <mo'i vi> means
16:16 < zipcpi> Do you mean "towards"?
16:16 < zipcpi> That would be fa'a
16:22  * nuzba @uitki: Logical Language Group - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Logical_Language_Group by LeoBeltran [http://bit.ly/1gdzFeg]
16:42 < Zearen> Some thing that move tangentially is mo'i vi, but not fa'a
16:43 < zipcpi> "Tangentially"? Think there is supposed to be something else for that
16:43 < Zearen> E.g. a comet headed towards the sun.
16:43 < Zearen> Maybe
16:43 < zipcpi> zo'a?
16:44 < Zearen> Maybe ?
16:44 < Zearen> I can't tell if it implies motion.  I think it does...
16:44 < zipcpi> There is mo'izo'a
16:44 < zipcpi> Dunno exactly what mo'i does though
16:45 < zipcpi> The ones working on formalization tell me it's "deep magic" lol
16:45 < Zearen> It implies a change.  It's kind of like a spatial aspect WRT time.
16:46 < zipcpi> I gotta go; see ya
16:46 < Zearen> co'o
19:20 < pimlu> coi
19:21 < Zearen> .i coi .i do ca mo
23:12 < gleki> i'd say that -gau doesnt imply volition
23:12 < gleki> -zu'e does.
23:14 < gleki> pimlu: pls register and upvote  questions with rating below 10 http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
23:20 < gleki> i ua la selkik ca'o y zukte
23:20 < gleki> gi'u lojbo zukte
23:26 < zipcpi> No one, NO ONE "pulls my leg" without getting kicked in the nuts
23:27 < zipcpi> No one plays with my emotions without getting more than they bargained for
23:27 < gleki> wrong channel xu
23:27 < gleki> u'i
23:28 < zipcpi> Ugh... he's not here
23:28 < zipcpi> I got into a fight with ctefaho
23:28 < zipcpi> I'm sick of his mind games
23:29 < gleki> this channel requires either speaking in lojban or about lojban
23:29 < zipcpi> Sigh... sorry
23:29 < zipcpi> I just dunno what to do about this crap
23:31 < gleki> any non lojba related stuff should be avoided
23:31 < gleki> sorry i didnt read the backlog
23:31 < zipcpi> It *was* about Lojban
23:32 < zipcpi> ba'e pu srana le jbobau
23:33 < gleki> then it was okay
23:37 < gleki> im very close to creating an eng2jbo dictionary
23:38 < zipcpi> Cool
23:38 < zipcpi> Do you need any more iolpe-type slates of words? :p
23:47 < b_jonas> Is {la .trabant. noi karce cu marji ma} the question I should ask if I want to ask what material something is made of, and expect an answer like {.i lo pelji} or {.i lo slasi}?
23:51 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/ki'oi
--- Day changed Fri Jul 03 2015
00:00 < zipcpi> b_jonas: I believe so
00:00 < b_jonas> je'e
00:04 < gleki> en: ki'oi
00:04 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
00:05 < zipcpi> lo'u fi'o kibystu le'u ja lo'u fi'o se kibzva le'u
00:07 < zipcpi> zmadu zo bu'u lo ka smudra ja filseljmi .i mu'a lu ki'oi ma li'u
00:13 < zipcpi> gleki: Not sure how grammatical your Chinese for xanto is. I have a feeling it's missing a few particles, but I'm not sure how much I trust myself
00:13 < zipcpi> shi4 ge4 da4 xiang4
00:14 < gleki> xanto?
00:14 < zipcpi> Well, that's the funny thing about Chinese though. At least in writing, it is quite understandable without those particles
00:14 < gleki> srana ma
00:14 < zipcpi> je'u zo xanto
00:15 < zipcpi> But Modern Mandarin Chinese has homophones by the reams, and thus all these particles evolved to make up for it
00:17 < zipcpi> 是个大象
00:17 < zipcpi> Also it's gone through its own version of CKTJ :p
00:18 < gleki> what is this all related to
00:18 < zipcpi> this =?
00:19 < zipcpi> Just saying by *my* intuition, 是象 should be replaced by 是个大象
00:19 < gleki> deilctic thing?
00:20 < zipcpi> I meant what you mean by "this"
00:22  * nuzba @uitki: L17-04 - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/L17-04 by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1JBEIlc]
00:24 < zipcpi> Hm... 10-15: you might want to include both {pano} etc. and the hex digits. Hex digits are a nice shorthand and have those experimental rafsi for month names, but {pano} may be easier to remember
00:25 < gleki> well, a new script-generated dictionary http://mw.lojban.org/papri/L17-04
00:25 < gleki> still some sorting problems
00:25 < zipcpi> K
00:26 < gleki> it puts × after "z"
01:00  * nuzba @uitki: punctuation - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/punctuation by Spheniscine [http://bit.ly/1RVt1VK]
01:11 < gleki> zipcpi: i got what you meant about xanto. but it wasnt me who translate gimste to chinese
01:11 < zipcpi> Ah
01:12 < gleki> it was panabsent,  a native chinese speaker
01:12 < zipcpi> je'e
01:13 < zipcpi> Well Chinese grammar is pretty flexible. It just felt somewhat empty to me without those particles, but perhaps they're just for disambiguation, which is less needed in writing
01:14 < gleki> looks like the lack of good search in jvs and the lack of eng2jbo dictionary is a serious problem
01:15 < zipcpi> I've been getting by with vlasisku but that hasn't been updated in a while
01:15 < gleki> we only need to finish tagging tatoeba.org sentences and i need to implement glossword search in sutysisku to cover them
01:15 < gleki> vlasisku doesnt search in glosswords
01:15 < gleki> try searching for "and"
01:15 < zipcpi> Right
01:15 < gleki> if it does it doesnt prioritize words with "and" as a glosssword
01:16 < gleki> only my laziness prevents me from adding glossword search
01:16 < zipcpi> Well it is kinda important; I have been avoiding sutysisku for eng2jbo because of it T.T
01:17 < gleki> vlasisku is not better
01:18 < zipcpi> Maybe not. So then I resort to going through the natlang list on JVS
01:18 < zipcpi> Which... yeah, sucks, as you know
01:18 < gleki> *mo
01:20 < gleki> *no
01:21 < zipcpi> no?
01:21 < gleki> vlasisku is no better
01:21 < zipcpi> Ah
01:22 < gleki> and i was against any server solutions exactly because i saw problems with the server
01:22 < gleki> with sutysisku we only need a simple hosting for static files
01:26 < gleki> i will have to create another sutysisku based on the two La Bangu dictionaries
01:26 < gleki> as for words not listed there it's a very complex problem
01:27 < gleki> many kurtyvla are ... idk
01:27 < zipcpi> u'i
01:27 < gleki> some maybe useful
01:28 < gleki> like {dutso}
01:28 < zipcpi> And {corci}
01:32 < gleki> so i can only manually select words
01:32 < gleki> and ofc. 17 000 words are too hard to check and add immediately.
01:33 < zipcpi> Not to mention lujvo and zi'evla
01:33 < gleki> en: 
01:34 < mensi> 19319 da se tolcri: a, a'a, a'acu'i, a'anai, abata'adj, abgad, abniena, abu, acaman, aclotlu, admine, advarka, adverbi,
01:34 < mensi> adverbivla, adverbu, adzau, a'e, a'enai, aftobuso, aftostopi, agbakate, agmasto, ai, a'i, a'icu'i, aicu'i, aidji, aigne,
01:34 < mensi> ainai, a'inai, aiste, aitco, aitxero, aizdo, akcoloti, akmela, akrobat, aksiptrina, akti, alba'aka, albatro, albuma,
01:34 < mensi> alcamacrike, aldeia, alfabeta, alga, algoritma, alkanse, alminiu, alna, alpaka, altamru, altare, altfor, altrici,
01:34 < mensi> alxataini, alzaitu, ambergri, ambigu'o, amble, ambuci, ambulance, amfite'atro, amfora, amgidala, amnio, amniota,
01:34 < mensi> ampigravle, ampute, amsake, amtisti, amxari, anci, andiroba, angeli, angila, anji, ankabuta, ankla, anli, ...
01:34 < gleki> okay, 19 319 words now in JVS
01:34 < gleki> most are ISO-fuhivla, okay.
01:34 < zipcpi> lol
01:34 < gleki> but what to do with them?
01:35 < zipcpi> ambigu'o? I've seen ambigu more often
01:35 < gleki> also this ocean=ve'u xamsi problem
01:36 < gleki> i think i will have to further  develop La Bangu dict. i will just tag iso-fuhivla as non core words.
01:36 < zipcpi> I think braxamsi might be able to have a different sense than ve'u xamsi, but I dunno, probably not inda lo ka pagbu la bangu
01:37 < gleki> that difference needs to be explained
01:37 < gleki> but take "ex-president"
01:37 < gleki> which is {lo ba'o jatna}
01:38 < zipcpi> Well difference is that braxamsi could mean "ocean", while ve'u-xamsi could be just any "sea" that's subjectively big
01:38 < gleki> what is ocean then
01:38 < zipcpi> But yeah ex-president probably doesn't need another word
01:39 < zipcpi> Well, there is a somewhat clear separation between the bodies of water that are called "seas", and the bodies that are called "ocean"s
01:39 < zipcpi> Mostly a naming thing
01:44 < gleki> what is that separation about?
01:45 < zipcpi> Like I said, mostly a naming thing
01:45 < gleki> im not sure lojbna should immediately relex english
01:45 < gleki> *lojban
01:45  * zipcpi shrugs... perhaps
01:46 < zipcpi> I mean, yeah, "Atlantic Ocean" probably can just be rammed into xamsi
01:46 < gleki> why not
01:48 < zipcpi> May be just an expression thing. {xamsi ja braxamsi} might sound better than {xamsi ja ve'u xamsi} (is the latter even grammatical?)
01:49 < zipcpi> exp: xamsi ja ve'u xamsi
01:49 < mensi> ([CU {xamsi VAU}] [ja {CU <ve'u xamsi> VAU} VAU])
01:49 < gleki> not in a sense you wanted
01:49 < zipcpi> It is under selpa'i, but it breaks in a way that might or might not be desired lol
01:49 < gleki> off: xamsi je ve'u xamsi
01:49 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "x" found.
01:50 < gleki> it's the same as {xamsi gi'e ve'u xamsi}
01:50 < gleki> under exp.
01:50  * zipcpi nods
01:50 < gleki> off: xamsi ja xamsi be ve'u
01:50 < mensi> ([xamsi {ja <xamsi (¹be [ve'u KU] BEhO¹)>}] VAU)
01:51 < Amnadya> the problem is we need a good way to say "the young ex-president". baho jatna isnt a ziltau and using "be" changes the word order
01:52 < gleki> {lo ba'o jatna noi citno}
01:52 < zipcpi> (I tend to prefer poi)
01:52 < gleki> adjectives correspond to NOI clauses in Lojban
01:54 < gleki> oh im so happy to delete that ugly spreadsheet that eventually failed to generate eng2jbo dictionary
01:55 < zipcpi> I've been using ze'oi or xo'i where I really can't be bothered to expand a tanru, but it's a bit cumbersome
01:57 < gleki> if tanru is really needed then it's {lo citno jatna be ba'o}
01:58 < zipcpi> Yep, works, but changes the word order making it somewhat cumbersome for glosses
02:00 < gleki> then {jatna ba'o}
02:01 < gleki> you'll have to add {be} anyway when converting {klama do} into a noun
02:01 < zipcpi> Hm
02:02 < Amnadya> baho zei jatna
02:02 < zipcpi> I do prefer ba'o jatna in the absence of tanru though; it's more natural for sumtcita in general. Dunno what the best solution is here *shrugs*
02:02 < gleki> ba'o zei jatna is a lujvo
02:03 < gleki> which means it can mean anything
02:04 < Amnadya> sure. baho zei jatna: x1 is a wooden table
02:05 < zipcpi> It's kind of why I invented {ze'oi}
02:05 < zipcpi> To avoid having to use zei when wanting to use random cmavo in a tanru
02:07 < zipcpi> As a "bonus", it's also a convenient way to convert cmevla in the absence of brivla-cmevla-merge grammar *shrugs*
02:22 < gleki> exp: li re xi dy cu mo
02:22 < mensi> ([li {re BOI <xi (¹dy BOI¹)>} LOhO] [cu {mo VAU}])
02:23 < gleki> it's usually 01h55m
02:23 < gleki> de'i li re poi se cacra is long
02:23 < zipcpi> Is this about detri system?
02:23 < gleki> yeah
02:23 < gleki> {za lo masti be li re za lo djedi be li mu} in two months and 5 days
02:24 < zipcpi> I dunno, I just chose prefix over postfix somewhat arbitrarily, but mainly because it parallels FA/sumtcita
02:24 < gleki> even if some de'i'i can take the place of {za} it will be long
02:24 < zipcpi> There's also moi'i
02:25 < gleki> re masti could be short but how to make them splice
02:25 < zipcpi> No wait moi'o
02:26 < gleki> it's just that for each coordinate we need to specify dimension
02:28 < ctefa`o> coi
02:28 < gleki> coi
02:30 < ctefa`o> .i coi la gleki .i xu lo gleki do mintu
02:30 < zipcpi> Go away. No one "pulls my leg" without being kicked in the nuts. No one plays with my emotions without getting more than they bargained for
02:30 < gleki> su'oroi
02:30 < ctefa`o> someone is upset alright
02:31 < ueiudhfi> pls
02:35 < zipcpi> You bet I'm upset. I hate liars, flatterers, and trolls
02:35 < zipcpi> You're not the first idiot who thinks he can just poke at me like some dog in a cage
02:36 < gleki> stop imeediately
02:36 < gleki> *immediately
02:36 < gleki> change to another channel
02:39 < ctefa`o> I thought he had put me on ignore but I will just stop mentioning anything related to him then
02:39 < zipcpi> I did but then you changed your name
02:39 < gleki> change to discussing lojban
02:39 < gleki> or discussing in lojban
02:41 < ctefa`o> I am on my phone!
02:41 < gleki> u'i do cpana lo fonxa
02:42 < ctefa`o> I am on my phone!
02:43 < ctefa`o> ...which lagged a bit and said the message didn't get through?
02:43 < ctefa`o> >_>
02:44 < ctefa`o> If I am bothering you so much just put this nick on ignore too
02:49 < ctefa`o> gleki: su'uroi happens
02:49 < ctefa`o> ...
02:49 < gleki> *su'oroi
02:49 < ctefa`o> su'oooo
02:50 < ctefa`o> si su'o'o'o'o'o'o'oroi
02:51 < ctefa`o> I suppose "fasnu" would work best for that "happens"?
02:52 < gleki> yes
02:53 < ctefa`o> {.i su'oroi fasnu}? not that used to roi
02:54 < gleki> yes
02:54 < ctefa`o> je'e
02:56  * nuzba @Zelts_57AlDBr83: ロジバン [http://bit.ly/1GUbCXk]
02:59 < ctefa`o> .i lo nu mi cpana lo mi fonxa cu su'oroi fasnu
03:01 < b_jonas> ctefa`o: I suggest you try {rapli li su'o} instead of {su'o roi fasnu}
03:01 < ctefa`o> xmm
03:02 < ctefa`o> Something wrong with making that the tense?
03:04 < ctefa`o> {.i lo nu mi cpana lo mi fonxa cu rapli li su'o} is better how?
03:05 < b_jonas> ctefa`o: nothing wrong, I just think it's unnecessaraily complicated for this
03:05 < ctefa`o> je'e
03:06 < b_jonas> And I really don't like {roi} and {re'u}
03:06 < b_jonas> so I don't use them much (but I still understand them)
03:07 < ctefa`o> I suppose roi would expand to something like rapli in this case
03:07 < ghhtzt> stop fighting. sort out your problems or fight elsewhere but please keep this place nice and civil thanks. feho
03:07 < ctefa`o> I am not fighting!
03:08 < ghhtzt> end of discussion.
03:08 < gleki> ctefa`o: e'uru'e do ciksi to bau lo jbobau li'a toi lo nu pu fasnu fa makau
03:09 < gleki> i za'a lo jbopre cu so'ujonai no roi damba casnu
03:10 < ctefa`o> (And someone making up random nicks to say things behind an ignore-wall is kinda pathetic)
03:10 < ctefa`o> fa'o
03:11 < zipcpi> ghhtzt isn't me
03:14 < ctefa`o> gleki: Explain what the past event was?
03:18 < ctefa`o> Explain the {lo nu mi cpana lo mi fonxa}?
03:30 < gleki> "that i am atop of my phone"
03:30 < gleki> literally
03:30 < gleki> ctefa`o: @
03:33 < ctefa`o> mi zutse ra ?
03:34 < gleki> not necessarily sitting, just on top
03:34 < ghhtzt> ra solri cevni
03:35 < ctefa`o> ja'a
03:37 < ctefa`o> Well, if I sit on it I am on top of it?
03:38 < gleki> yes, but not vice versa
03:40 < ctefa`o> Do you mean explaining the concept of being on top?
03:40 < gleki> if you are on top you are not necessarily sitting on it
03:40 < ctefa`o> I think that's kinda hard to do when someone is not physically present
03:40 < ctefa`o> Iep
03:42 < gleki> you may be lying on top of it
03:43 < ctefa`o> je'u
03:44 < ctefa`o> Made me think of trying to explain colors
03:45 < ctefa`o> It only reallly works when you have other colors to refer to
03:46 < zipcpi> Wuzzy made {nulpa'a} a synonym of {kanpe}... heh... 10 years
03:47 < gleki> утЖ тгдзфэф
03:47 < gleki> en: nulpa'a
03:47 < mensi> nulpa'a [< nutli pacna ≈ Neutral wish] = p1 expects/looks for the occurence of p2 (event), expected likelihood p3 (0-1);
03:47 < mensi> p1 subjectively evaluates the likelihood of p2 (event) to be p3. |>>> The value of x3 is a subjective estimate of
03:47 < mensi> likeliness according to x1, and is the basic determinant of whether kanpe means something like "hope" or "wish" or "
03:47 < mensi> expect", although kanpe never carries the connotation of desire; for that connotation see pacna. nulpa'a with x3 not
03:47 < mensi> very close to 1 has no simple equivalent in English, but for objects/states with negligible expectation it is something
03:47 < mensi> like "wishing"; if the state is plausibly likely, it is something like "hoping". In both cases, though, the English
03:47 < mensi> implication of emotional desire is no...
03:47 < mensi> [mo'u se katna] http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/nulpa'a
03:48 < ghhtzt> pehi loka kanpe na srana loka pacna
03:49 < gleki> he seems to not have removed kanpe
03:49 < gleki> from notes
03:49 < zipcpi> Yeah...
03:55 < gleki> what was selpahi suggesting about mixed lerfu/number strings? somethingto do with ana phora but what exactly
03:55 < zipcpi> Er I don't think he suggested numbers?
03:55 < gleki> he suggested fixing anaphora instead
03:55 < zipcpi> I think he wanted to redefine a set of lerfu sumka'i to mean particular classes of nouns, by default
03:56 < gleki> i.e. {*abu* cu za'ure'u cusku}
03:56 < gleki> maybe that
03:56 < gleki> well, no since that is not relevant
03:56 < zipcpi> Don't think he did anything about the {boi} problem that xornunsep is trying to fix
03:56 < gleki> once he suggested fixing the meaning of letterals
03:57 < gleki> but that doesnt fix mixed strings
03:57 < zipcpi> Exactly
03:57 < gleki> fy = le fetsi etc.
03:57 < zipcpi> Yep
03:57 < zipcpi> Although he himself avoids le lol
03:57 < gleki> and i dont udnerstand wy xorxes wants that half-solution. he never replied to my {re boi remoi} counterexample
03:58 < zipcpi> I find that less problematic because I find I'm able to detect two numbers running together better
03:59 < gleki> x is a variable representing a number
03:59 < zipcpi> But while using Lojban I've often caught myself making that abu za'u mistake
03:59 < zipcpi> And then I say
03:59 < zipcpi> la xornunsep za'ure'u jinga
03:59 < gleki> it sounds like fixing system based on current misusage
04:00 < gleki> then let's fix {lo mlatu pinxe} killing tanru
04:00 < zipcpi> You could say about the same thing about dotside though
04:01 < gleki> i will just never use letterals anaphorically then
04:01 < gleki> if that bothers anyone
04:02 < zipcpi> le nu ku ; le abu ku ; *shot*
04:02 < gleki> le abu mo
04:03 < gleki> i sefsi la'a
04:05 < gleki> http://cdg.pleolight.net/Rgjh
04:05 < gleki> Blog : Puku naku wallpapers
04:06 < zipcpi> Maybe that would actually convince selpa'i of {le}; it's not too different from his {le naku} idea... hah
04:06 < ghhtzt> off: ny moi
04:06 < mensi> ([ny moi] VAU)
04:07 < gleki> exp: ny moi
04:07 < mensi> (CU [{ny BOI} moi] VAU)
04:07 < gleki> exp: ny su'i re moi
04:07 < mensi> (CU [{<ny BOI> <su'i (¹re BOI¹)>} moi] VAU)
04:07 < ghhtzt> there is a proposal to merge PA and BY into PA.  why can we say pamoi and pa lo broda but nymoi and not ny lo broda
04:07 < zipcpi> What kind of website is that? Looks like just a bunch of stuff glued together for some nefarious SEO purpose
04:07 < gleki> je'usai
04:08 < gleki> "n broda", why not
04:08 < zipcpi> exp: ny broda
04:08 < mensi> ([ny BOI] [CU {broda VAU}])
04:08 < gleki> n of broda*
04:08 < zipcpi> exp: mo'e ny broda
04:08 < mensi> ([{<mo'e (¹ny BOI¹) TEhU> BOI} broda KU] VAU)
04:09 < zipcpi> Who's trying to break grammar now? lol
04:09 < gleki> li mo'e dy re mo'e ly re
04:09 < gleki> exp: li mo'e dy re mo'e ly re
04:09 < mensi> ([li {<(¹mo'e [dy BOI] TEhU¹) (¹re [mo'e {ly BOI} TEhU] re¹)> BOI} LOhO] VAU)
04:10 < gleki> exp: li re mo'e dy re mo'e ly
04:10 < mensi> ([li {<re (¹mo'e [dy BOI] TEhU¹) re (¹mo'e [ly BOI] TEhU¹)> BOI} LOhO] VAU)
04:10 < zipcpi> That works, but xu smudra
04:10 < zipcpi> And a little long
04:11 < ghhtzt> xornunsep and selpamnunpav
04:12 < zipcpi> Heh
04:14 < zipcpi> And my own crazy idea is to relax the gadri rules, so that {le ku} can be a nonce deixis
04:14 < zipcpi> Not sure how {le nu ku} would work without going full alta though
04:17 < zipcpi> alta: le nu ku
04:17 < mensi> ([FA {le <nu (¹[FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}]¹) KEI> ku}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
04:18 < zipcpi> alta: le na ku
04:18 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] but end of input found.
04:18 < gleki> oh
04:18 < zipcpi> Oops
04:18 < gleki> file a bug
04:18 < gleki> alta: le ku
04:18 < mensi> ([FA {le COhE ku}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
04:20 < gleki> btw if someone doesnt know  there is a tool to test your PEG grammars online http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/mahantufa/ircitufa.html
04:22  * nuzba @uitki: jbonunsla - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/jbonunsla by Pier.abat - /* Logfest 2015/jbonunsla 2015 */ date and place [http://bit.ly/1JGxeum]
04:22 < gleki> that bug is limited to NA_clause
04:23 < gleki> wasnt NA_clause supposed to be merged with tense_modal?
04:24 < ghhtzt> zona na sumtcita
04:25 < gleki> ma prali
04:25 < gleki> alta: lo na ku
04:25 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] but end of input found.
04:27 < gleki> alta: lo na ku
04:27 < mensi> ([FA {lo <na COhE> ku}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
04:27 < gleki> what i didnt understand is that why tags were at selbri level but NA_clause at selbri_1 level
04:28 < gleki> now they are both at selbri level in alta
04:28 < gleki> ni'o since {lo trene} means "carvan" how to say "railroad train" then?
04:29 < gleki> trene lo karce?
04:29 < gleki> trene lo carce?
04:31 < Amnadya> laha
04:33  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/selbrisle    おおおおおおお！ selbrisle ！（個人的に革命的単語） [http://bit.ly/1JGz8ev]
04:39 < Amnadya> mi pu facki fi soho nabmi pe la itkuhile i je mi xanka lonu la kiiadas ba spusku loseduhu na nabmi kei jeba cikre noda
04:40 < gleki> do du sy ibo xu
04:40 < gleki> i jaho na gohi
04:41 < Amnadya> gohi i zvati lo xamsi jibni
04:42 < Amnadya> i vitci ke fonxa kibro
04:42 < gleki> uasai
04:42 < gleki> i do e la cirko zoha pilno zohoi h
04:42 < gleki> sa
04:43 < gleki> i do e la cirko coha pilno zohoi h
04:43 < gleki> i ei mi stidi da pe la itkuhile
04:43 < gleki> github.com => repo => Fork
04:43 < gleki> pe'a
04:43 < gleki> u'i
04:44 < gleki> i ji'a ko jmina la to'anzu lo do se forki sorcu i taiku do finti lo cnino je kalsa glekitufa si bangu
04:45 < gleki> i xu do zvati la xunre xamsi
04:47 < Amnadya> la stuna xamsi kune la dotyguhe
04:48 < gleki> uanai
04:48 < gleki> i xu zasti
04:48 < Amnadya> berti ikuhi zo stuna cmene
04:48 < gleki> i de'i ma lo gugdepulu co'a xamsi
04:48 < gleki> i ua
04:50 < gleki> in interstellar communications even from/to the Earth/Moon 3 second delay between messages will make {go'i} useless since you wont be able to understand what you were referring to unless everyone waits for three seconds
04:50 < zipcpi> u'i
04:50 < zipcpi> Use go'oi for a little more safety
04:50 < zipcpi> Not completely safe though
04:51 < gleki> en: go'oi
04:51 < mensi> go'oi = [GOhOI] pro-bridi: quotes the next word and repeats the most recent bridi containing that word |>>> The quoting
04:51 < mensi> rules are the same as zo. |>>> durka42
04:51 < gleki> li'ei isnt in peg
04:52 < gleki> go'oi isnt in peg
04:52 < zipcpi> Yeah...
04:52 < zipcpi> GOhOI needs to be though, to canonize {ze'oi}
04:52 < zipcpi> li'ei is just short for {li pe'o joi'i}
04:53 < gleki> and i cant see how li'ei is different from li. why not making li as powerful as li'ei? how does it affect abu za'ure'u?
04:53 < zipcpi> Ask xorxes lol
04:53 < gleki> i think i will restore the original system back
04:54 < zipcpi> Like I said I support xornunsep *except* li...lo'o
04:54 < zipcpi> So to me {li} works just like {li'ei}... but obviously xorxes disagrees
04:54 < gleki> xornunsep isnt in LMW
04:55 < zipcpi> Yeah but it is in exp
04:55 < zipcpi> Maybe we need to split exp for the "common but not completely canonized", and the "actual experimental" parser
04:56 < zipcpi> So that stuff like xornunsep can go into exp without affecting the kampu usage
04:58  * nuzba @uitki: L17-01 - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/L17-01 by Gleki - /* Basic notions */ [http://bit.ly/1HAMNEt]
05:01 < zipcpi> {ze'oi} is just indispensible if we want to stem the tide of {zei}-abuse :p
05:16 < gleki> en: ze'oi
05:16 < mensi> ze'oi = [GOhOI] converts following word to selbri: "x1 is related to the meaning of this word in aspect x2" |>>> Quoting
05:16 < mensi> rules are similar to zo. Roughly, (ze'oi *coi*) ≈ (me la'e zo *coi* moi). Meant primarily to quote cmavo, to supersede
05:16 < mensi> use of zei as a way of making "tanru" out of cmavo. |>>> spheniscine
05:16 < zipcpi> cmavo/cmevla -> selbrisle
05:17 < zipcpi> Just a really rough conversion, with no very-precise meaning
05:35 < amnadya1> attawîl!
05:39 < gleki> ithkuil: attawîl
05:39 < ithkuil> attawîl: P1S1/STA-tt-OBL-DEC/FAC-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
05:41 < amnadya1> melbi ikuhi laha sidju jihinoda
05:42 < gleki> zo'oi ifl mo
05:43 < gleki> amnadya1: @
05:45 < amnadya1> informal designation
05:46 < zipcpi> lu melbi ikuhi laha sidju jihinoda li'u u'i
05:46 < gleki> dec = declarative?
05:47 < gleki> i go'i
05:47 < gleki> ithkuil: a'ctattal
05:47 < ithkuil> a’ctattal: P1S1/STA-CTX/PPS/DEC-MNO-tt-OBL-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
05:47 < gleki> oh i almost got there
05:47 < ctefa`o> We have a ithkuil bot? o_O
05:49 < gleki> hm, but is there a default phase?
05:49 < zipcpi> ithkuil: akt’asalb
05:50 < gleki> very strange. i combined something but with phase and sanction
05:50 < zipcpi> http://www.ithkuil.net/sound_files/akarenina.mp3 Erm, do you need me to call the doctor? :p
05:50 < zipcpi> doi bacru .i xu do nitcu lo mikce
05:50 < gleki> wth is this attawil
05:51 < zipcpi> What's attawil?
05:51 < zipcpi> http://www.ithkuil.net/texts.html
05:51 < gleki> see backlog
05:52 < zipcpi> I don't know what it means... oh... is it "hello"?
05:52 < gleki> ctx/pps/dec/mno - how to remove that and how to add dec/fac after OBL?
05:53 < amnadya1> wë
05:54 < gleki> sanction, valence and phase are to be removed and illocution is to be moved
05:54 < gleki> ithkuil: a'ctattal
05:54 < ithkuil> a’ctattal: P1S1/STA-CTX/PPS/DEC-MNO-tt-OBL-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
05:54 < gleki> ithkuil: wë                                                            
05:54 < ithkuil> wë: Personal adjunct
05:55 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/ithkuil/index1.html <-- it's just broken
05:56 < gleki> ithkuil: attawal
05:56 < ithkuil> attawal: P1S1/STA-tt-OBL-ASR/SUB-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
05:56 < gleki> ithkuil: attawîl
05:56 < ithkuil> attawîl: P1S1/STA-tt-OBL-DEC/FAC-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
05:57 < niftg> ta'o lo banzu ke itku'ile gentufa nu'o xu se finti
05:57 < gleki> ithkuil: attal
05:57 < ithkuil> attal: P1S1/STA-tt-OBL-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
05:57 < amnadya1> attál = attàwël
05:58 < gleki> ithkuil: a'ctattal
05:58 < ithkuil> a’ctattal: P1S1/STA-CTX/PPS/DEC-MNO-tt-OBL-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
05:58 < gleki> attal changes to a'ctattal when changing illocution from assertive to DEClarative
05:59 < gleki> i suppose this might be a bug since table 9 disagrees http://ithkuil.net/05_verbs_1.html#Sec5o6
06:00 < amnadya1> ie naldra
06:42 < gleki> mensi: doi amnad da djica lo ka se ctuca fi la lojban vau gi'e bredi lo ka pleji
06:42 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.amnad.gy. di'a cusku da
06:52 < gleki> en: so'iroi
06:52 < gleki> en: piso'iroi
06:53 < mensi> so'iroi = [ROI*] tense interval modifier: many times; objective tense; defaults as time tense. |>>>
06:53 < mensi> officialdata
06:53 < mensi> piso'iroi = [ROI*] tense interval modifier: often; objectively quantified tense; defaults as time tense. |>>>
06:53 < mensi> officialdata
06:54 < gleki> and those are official data
06:54 < gleki> another question. shall we finally have a BAI for {fi'o se cpana}?
07:18 < gleki> You ought to have been there; it was great fun.
07:18 < gleki> ^ translate that
07:18 < gleki> ought to =  Used to indicate desirability
07:24 < gleki> "have to do with". looks like the shortest word for that is ... {gleua}
07:30 -!- Irssi: #lojban: Total of 154 nicks [2 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 152 normal]
09:09 < Zearen> .i coi
09:10 < dutchie> coi
09:13 < Zearen> .i ma nuzba
09:20 < durka42> mi pinxe lo ckafi
09:20 < dutchie> ei mi zdani gunka ca bavlamjetfu .i mi na nelci ki'u lo nu mi na'e kansa lo prenu
09:20 < mensi> i mi i mi i mi mo i mi na nelci
09:21 < dutchie> ca lo*
09:21 < gleki> alta: coi do'u ma nuzba
09:21 < mensi> ([coi DO do'u] [FA ma] [CU {nuzba VAU}])
09:21 < durka42> za'a la .cogas. cu finti lo so'o cizra cmavo
09:21 < gleki> {do} autorestored in voactives now
09:22 < gleki> in empty vocatives sa'e
09:22 < gleki> alta: coi i ma nuzba
09:22 < mensi> ([coi DO DOhU] [i {FA ma} {CU <nuzba VAU>}])
09:23 < Latro__> coi
09:24 < Zearen> .i mi na nelci lo ckafi .imu'ibo cy. dukse loni kurki
09:24 < mensi> ji'a mi mutce nelci i ie
09:24 < Zearen> .y. doi mensi do cizra
09:26 < latro`a> .i coi zy
09:26 < Zearen> .i doi la'oi durka42 cizra fi ma
09:26 < Zearen> .i coi ly.
09:26 < durka42> cizra fi lo ka cnino genstura
09:27 < latro`a> .i ma cizra
09:27 < gleki> i also dont like this "vocative relative_clauses? selbri"
09:27 < gleki> i think LE has to be restored there
09:27 < Zearen> .i lonu lonu do se kulnu lo lojbo cu ranji cu pluka mi doi ly.
09:29 < Zearen> .i dy. pu cusku lo se du lo cizra cmavo poi se finti la .cogas.
09:30 < durka42> latro`a: xu do zgana zo co'ei je zo be'oi je zo bei'oi
09:30 < durka42> srana lo sumtcita valsi
09:39 < gleki> alta: coi broda
09:39 < mensi> ([coi {LE broda KU} DOhU] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
09:39 < gleki> LE autorestored
09:39 < gleki> alta: coi noi du vau broda noi mo
09:39 < mensi> ([coi {LE <(¹noi [{FA ZOhE} {CU <du vau>}] KUhO¹) (¹broda [noi {FA ZOhE} {CU <mo VAU>}] KUhO¹)> KU} DOhU] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
09:40 < gleki> let it be LO
09:40 < gleki> alta: coi broda
09:40 < mensi> ([coi {LO broda KU} DOhU] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
09:41 < gleki> and of course technically {coi selbri} is now banned
09:42 < gleki> it's only by virtue of LO autorestoration that it still works
10:15 < Ilmen> mensi: da poi bu'a
10:15 < mensi> mi na birti lo nu mi mulno jimpe lo se smusku be do
10:15 < Ilmen> exp: da poi bu'a
10:15 < mensi> ([da {poi <CU (¹bu'a VAU¹)> KUhO}] VAU)
10:16 < samcinki> alta: da poi bu'a
10:16 < mensi> ([FA {da <poi (¹[FA ZOhE] [CU {bu'a VAU}]¹) KUhO>}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
10:16 < Ilmen> Huh. Why FA ZOhE here?
10:17 < Ilmen> Does ZOhE covers ke'a?
10:18 < Ilmen> alta: mi ckaji lo ka broda
10:18 < mensi> ([FA mi] [CU {ckaji <FE (¹lo [ka {<FA ZOhE> <CU (²broda VAU²)>} KEI] KU¹)> VAU}])
10:18 < gleki> ke'a isnt supported yet
10:18 < gleki> neither ce'u
10:19 < Ilmen> Also, nullary predicates may exist, so maybe autoinserting FA ZOhE is unnecessary
10:19 < gleki> im not sure they can exist
10:20 < gleki> broda1 is assumed by PEG
10:39 < gleki> okay bugs  into ithkuil word generator are coming
10:40 < Zearen> .i lo .alta cu mo
10:40 < Zearen> sa .i la .alta. cu mo
10:46 < ctefaho> It seems bridi-tail tail-terms are not supported in the simplified connective system?
10:47 < ctefaho> after gi'e was cut out
10:47 < durka42> really?
10:47 < durka42> that should be a bug in the parser if so
10:47 < Zearen> gije = gi'e, so what ?
10:48 < Zearen> Is there a new parser being written for fancylojban ?
10:49 < ctefaho> ah I was mistaken
10:49 < ctefaho> nvm
10:49 < ctefaho> je-cu behaves exactly like gi'e then
10:49 < ctefaho> ki'e durka
10:51 < ctefaho> Zearen: http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/how-to-substantially-simplify-the-lojban-connective-system-my-connective-system
10:52 < durka42> as far as I know the experimental camxes supports GIhE, GIJE, and JECU
10:52 < Zearen> I was actually around for xalbo's balni ke jorne valsi galfi or some such
10:52 < durka42> (I was surprised that they are all compatible)
10:53 < Zearen> Er, not xalbo, xorxes
10:54 < Zearen> Except it was very new a controversial.  I'd be surprised if it's still not controversial.
10:54 < durka42> well that's always going to depend on who you ask :)
10:55  * durka42 is happy using {je cu}
10:55 < durka42> iepei doi la mensi
10:55 < mensi> mi tugni i ie mi tugni
10:56 < Zearen> .i mu'i lonu la mensi cu tugni drani li'a gije banli
11:01 < latro`a> alta: .i jetnu fa pa me lo du'u broda jo'u lo du'u brode
11:01 < mensi> (i [FA ZOhE] [CU {jetnu <fa (¹pa BOI¹) (¹me [{lo <du'u (²[FA ZOhE] [CU {broda VAU}]²) KEI> KU} {jo'u <lo (²du'u [{FA ZOhE} {CU <brode VAU>}] KEI²) KU>}] MEhU¹) KU> VAU}])
11:01 < latro`a> cool, that does what I wanted
11:04 < durka42> that first {fa zo'e} seems wrong
11:08 < latro`a> I'm not sure why it does that when you fill the fa place afterward
11:09 < latro`a> (that wasn't what I wanted to get out of it, though; I wanted to be sure the jo'u worked the way I expected)
11:09 < latro`a> (this was for zipcpi's mriste post from a few days ago)
11:09 < latro`a> incidentally, did we ever decide on a word for the connective "fold" operator?
11:11 < latro`a> that is, something like NEW_WORD CONNECTIVE ARG1 ARG2 ... ARGn NEW_TERMINATOR -> ARG1 CONNECTIVE ARG2 ... CONNECTIVE ARGn?
11:14 < durka42> liberating {pe'o} from its mekso confines, eh
11:16 < latro`a> I pretty much pretend the MEX cmavo except maybe su'i/vu'u/pi'i are unallocated, these days
11:17 < durka42> :)
11:18 < durka42> well maybe {pe'o} could be this NEW_WORD?
11:18 < durka42> is it possible, though? it seems like there are going to be a bunch of edge cases with termsets
11:18 < durka42> not that it would be terrible if termsets died in a fire
11:30  * nuzba @s_i_d_a: lo sicpi sance     cu pagre lo kertinytci     .ije menli cilmo    #lojban #haiku [http://bit.ly/1NCinC5]
11:49 < gleki> that fa zo'e isnt wrong.
11:50 < gleki> simplu la alta asserts that bridi haed cant be empty of FA
11:50 < gleki> simply la alta asserts that bridi haed cant be empty of FA
11:50 < gleki> following how linkargs work (starting from x2 since x1 is always filled)
11:50 < gleki> oh, ilmen left
11:52 < gleki> mensi: doi lmen i m not sure how ke'a autorestoration can be implemented in peg parsers. consider {mi noi klama do noi ke'a ke'a du}. what each of ke'a refer to? to different {noi} or to the same? another question is {mi noi klama do noi du ke'a}. should {noi du} be restored into {noi ke'a du} or the only ke'a refers to the second {noi} already?
11:52 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.lmen.gy. di'a cusku da
11:54 < gleki> latro`a: im sure selpahi added that word into jvs
11:54 < gleki> selmaho:me
11:54 < mensi> .i lu me li'u cmavo zo'oi ME
11:54 < mensi> http://lojban.github.io/cll/5/10/
11:54 < mensi> http://lojban.github.io/cll/18/1/
11:54 < mensi> cmavo: me, me'au, mei'o, me'oi, me'u
11:54 < durka42> I agree, I don't think "find the first open sumti slot" can be expressed in a PEG
11:55 < gleki> i just dont know what is the algorithm when ke'a can be embedded deep inside embedded clauses
11:57 < gleki> it's not about autorestoration of ke'a but about which ke'a refers to which clause
11:58 < durka42> oh
11:58 < durka42> pe'i it's always the innermost
11:58 < durka42> you can subscript to get outwards
12:00 < gleki> the please answer my two questions
12:01 < cliva> en: mei'e
12:01 < mensi> mei'e = Accepts any number of sumti and turns them into a selbri-unit that means "x1 is among the referents of these
12:01 < mensi> sumti". |>>> See me, menre, cmima. Elidable terminator: mei'o |>>> spheniscine
12:01 < durka42> mi noi klama do noi ke'a ke'a du -- both ke'a refer to du
12:01 < durka42> sorry
12:01 < durka42> mi noi klama do noi ke'a ke'a du -- both ke'a refer to do
12:01 < durka42> mi noi klama do noi du ke'a -- du1 is unspecified, du2 is do
12:02 < gleki> but the first {noi} should search for its closest ke'a
12:02 < durka42> I think of it as ke'a search for noi, heh :)
12:03 < gleki> it should be formalized and described somewhere
12:03  * durka42 glances over the BPFK sections
12:04 < durka42> vlaste: ke'a (selma'o)
12:04 < vlaste> ke'a (class) = KOhA7
12:04 < durka42>  In the case of nested relative clauses, ke'a or ke'a xi pa refers to the inner-most sumti to which the relative clause containing it is attached. ke'a xi re refers to the next outer-most relative clause attached sumti, and so on for higher numbers.
12:06 < gleki> nandu
12:07 < gleki> even more nandu when ke'a is omitted
12:07 < durka42> tersmus: mi noi klama do noi ke'a ke'a du cu co'e
12:07 < tersmus> klama(mi,do);  (do == do);  co'e(mi)
12:08 < durka42> tersmus: mi noi klama do noi du ke'a cu co'e
12:08 < tersmus> klama(mi,do);  (  == do);  co'e(mi)
12:08 < durka42> in this case I agree with la tersmus
12:08 < durka42> tersmus: mi noi klama do noi du ke'axire cu co'e
12:08 < tersmus> klama( ,do);  FA x1. (do == x1);  co'e(mi)
12:08 < durka42> wat
12:08 < durka42> .u'i
12:24 < gleki> so is the rule that in the absense of ke'a the first unfilled slot of the noi clause is to be filled with ke'a?
12:25 < durka42> in my view yeah
12:25 < durka42> I think that's the rule
12:25 < durka42> well, _unless_ a ke'a is explicitly specified
12:25 < durka42> then that takes precedence over the "search for the first slot" rule
12:37 < gleki> alta: lo brodi broda cu mo
12:37 < mensi> ([FA {lo <brodi (¹broda NF¹)> KU}] [cu {mo VAU}])
12:37 < gleki> alta: lo brodi broda ui cu mo
12:37 < mensi> ([FA {lo <brodi (¹broda [NF ui]¹)> KU}] [cu {mo VAU}])
12:38 < gleki> indeed NF is like a UI
12:40 < gleki> now {dansu NF} will be glossed as "dancer" and all other cases as "dances"
12:59  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa menli fa
13:36  * nuzba @Rodericus: @Eleder_ Solo se me ocurre en la lengua construida lojban, donde hay varias formas decir «no» como negación… total (hay otras negaciones) y [http://bit.ly/1Cg4KIm]
13:48 < cliva> doi lo djuno be lo du'u mo kau .i lu ko'a tersumei li su'o li'u se smuni ge'i lo du'u su'o dubmau be li pa cu se pormei ro terbri be ko'a gi lo du'u ro terbri co'e su'o dubmau
13:48 < cliva> sisisi cu co'e su'o dubmau
13:50 < durka42> en:tersumei
13:50 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
13:50 < durka42> en:tersu'imei
13:50 < mensi> tersu'imei [< te sumti mei ≈ 3rd conversion argument cardinal selbri] = x1 (property/relation) is x2-ary/
13:50 < mensi> -adic
13:51 < durka42> mi na jimpe
13:51 < zipcpi> {te'i'o}?? What have I done
13:51 < Ilmen> li'a .i glibau velski
13:51 < mensi> Ilmen: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: i m not sure how ke'a autorestoration can be implemented in peg parsers. consider {mi noi
13:51 < mensi> klama do noi ke'a ke'a du}. what each of ke'a refer to? to different {noi} or to the same? another question is {mi noi
13:51 < mensi> klama do noi du ke'a}. should {noi du} be restored into {noi ke'a du} or the only ke'a refers to the second {noi}
13:51 < mensi> already? | 2015-07-03T18:52:54.625Z
13:51 < durka42> cliva: se smuni lo du'u bridi fi su'o pa da
13:52 < zipcpi> I think ke'a always refer to the same referent, unlike ce'u
13:52 < cliva> .. ia nai
13:52 < zipcpi> At least, within one NOI clause
13:52 < durka42> zipcpi: ie
13:52 < cliva> .i fi lo pormei be li su'o pa
13:52 < durka42> iebu'o
13:52 < cliva> .i ku'i ma sko'opu stura .i xu .ambigu sa'u
13:53 < durka42> lojbo .i na .ambigu .u'i
13:53 < zipcpi> ca'e na ambigu fe'o fe'o fe'o
13:53 < cliva> le zei le
13:54 < durka42> lu le zei le li'u du zo le
13:54 < Ilmen> mensi: doi la gleki In {mi noi do viska fo'u noi ke'a ke'a}, both ke'a refers to the same referent. Any new NOI reassign ke'a's referent, till the end of the NOI clause. To access the previous ke'a-referent, {ke'a xi re} must be used.
13:54 < mensi> Ilmen: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.la.gy. di'a cusku da
13:54 < zipcpi> ue mi jinvi lo du lu le zei le li'u selbrisle
13:54 < cliva> ma'i lo fadni gerna cu go'i
13:55 < Ilmen> doi la cliva lu ko'a tersu'imei li su'o li'u zo'u li'a co'e lo du'u naku su'o kunti porsi cu se zilbri ko'a
13:55 < Ilmen> .i va'i sa'unai su'o da sumti
13:56 < Ilmen> .i lo da'i sumti memkai cenba selbri zo'u lu ko'a tersu'imei za'u da li'u .e'u
13:57 < cliva> je'e
13:57 < Ilmen> .i xu lo se cusku be mi cu jai rinka lo nu do co'a djuno lo voi do pu kucli
13:57 < cliva> ja'a go'i
13:57 < Ilmen> je'e
13:57 < cliva> .i'o
13:57 < Ilmen> je'e ŭi
13:57 < bigcentaur> .i coi ro do
13:57 < zipcpi> oi za'umoi ke mekso cmavo
13:58 < cliva> kentauru co la co coi
13:58 < zipcpi> xaksu piro le cmavo canlu
13:58 < bigcentaur> lu co la co li'u ki'a
13:59 < zipcpi> lo zasni gerna pe la cliva iau u'i
13:59 < cliva> va'o su'o gerna zo co ka'e se pilno fi lo cizra
13:59 < cliva> alta: lo djedi co pu zi
13:59 < mensi> ([{<lo (¹djedi NF¹) KU> co <pu zi>} {FA ZOhE}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
13:59 < zipcpi> exp: kentauru co la co coi
13:59 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] but "i" found.
13:59 < zipcpi> alta: kentauru co la co coi
13:59 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] but "i" found.
14:00 < cliva> (to ma'oi le zo'u nandu fa lo ka jmina .i se sarcu lo ka jdice so'o da pe la sumti rebla toi)
14:00 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/ambigu ma du fobu ki'a
14:02 < zipcpi> "x1 is ambiguous, being possibly x2 or x3, according to observer x4?
14:02 < cliva> "me lo ka ganse jo'u lo ka te smuni jo'u lo simsa"
14:03 < cliva> .i mi na djuno lo du'u ma kau krinu lo nu pagbu lo terbri stura
14:03 < zipcpi> u'i
14:05  * nuzba @Eleder_: @Rodericus Muy bueno! Pensaba más bien en lenguas naturales, pero es perfecto :) Un día tengo que aprender más de lojban... [http://bit.ly/1GVA4aM]
14:21 < cliva> lo ze'irsaivi cu ci'i si'au mei
14:23 < cliva> ta'o
14:23 < cliva> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/fau'e
14:24 < cliva> .i xu ja'a ka'e ku lo cmavo na se tcita fi lo ka ma kau selma'o
14:40  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa menli fa
14:43 < zipcpi> doi cliva .i ja'a .i la'a se krinu lo nu gau frili lo na'e certu be tau lo selma'o
14:44 < dutchie> .ui mi jinga fo lo caxmati .i ze'upu na jinga
14:50 < dutchie> .i mi bazi sipna .i co'o rodo
14:52 < Amnadya> coho
14:52 < mensi> Amnadya: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: da djica lo ka se ctuca fi la lojban vau gi'e bredi lo ka pleji | 2015-07-03T13:42:31.
14:52 < mensi> 411Z
14:52 < zipcpi> co'o doi dutci
14:52 < zipcpi> vlaste: dutci (gimka)
14:52 < vlaste> zo dutci gimkamsmikezypro zo tutci noi catni gismu .i zo dutci gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
14:52 < mensi> vlaste: cu'u la'o gy.Ilmen.gy.: gleki In {mi noi do viska fo'u noi ke'a ke'a}, both ke'a refers to the same referent.
14:52 < mensi> Any new NOI reassign ke'a's referent, till the end of the NOI clause. To access the previous ke'a-referent, {ke'a xi re}
14:52 < mensi> must be used. | 2015-07-03T20:54:17.948Z
14:52 < zipcpi> u'i
14:52 < vlaste> 2362 results: smugau, cuntu, gleki, kevna, latmo, notci, viska, bitmu, bongu, boxfo…
14:53 < zipcpi> .y.
14:53 < zipcpi> vlaste: dutci (gimka)
14:53 < vlaste> zo dutci gimkamsmikezypro zo tutci noi catni gismu .i zo dutci gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
14:53 < zipcpi> simlu lo ka la mensi cu ji'isre lo du la gleki cu cusku kei oi
14:54 < zipcpi> .y. srera lo ka sko'opygau le cnima'o
14:55 < Amnadya> da du ma doi la gleki ixu la rutytar
14:55 < zipcpi> la dutci na du la rutytar
14:56 < Amnadya> liha
14:56 < zipcpi> jo'au tcekitau na du'u u'i
15:04 < durka42> .u'i la .krtis. cu spusku
15:04 < durka42> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/comments.html?valsi=27179;natlangword=0;commentid=1464;definition=0
15:06 < zipcpi> ku'i mi na certu lo mekso xoi banzuni lo ka jimpe
15:06 < zipcpi> ci'iba'umei cmavo porsi
15:07 < durka42> ie
15:09 < zipcpi> ki'aki'aki'aki'a
15:10 < zipcpi> ki'a'o ki'a'e ki'a'i ki'a'au
15:10 < zipcpi> ki'a'a'o'e'i'u'a'e
15:11 < durka42> clearly we need a series of ki'a'V for explaining just what it is you're confused about
15:11 < zipcpi> u'i
15:12 < durka42> {ki'a'y} is reserved for forgetting which ki'a'V applies
15:12 < zipcpi> ki'a'o'e - elliptical confusion
15:16 < zipcpi> ei lo ma'ormekso cu se daspo .i zabna fa lo brimekso
15:16 < zipcpi> a'o ze'u jmive
15:22 < zipcpi> zo te'i'o ki'a .i si'au zo xe'e co'a patfu pe'a lo cmavo poi za'uva'ei se ki'anmo
15:26 < zipcpi> ... mo le cnino jefydei ciste poi se finti la vonxlu
15:26 < zipcpi> skari srana
15:26 < durka42> mo ra'o
15:26 < durka42> ei mi tcidu lo mriste
15:26 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/xundei?bg=1;langidarg=2
15:26 < durka42> za'a la .bab. cu nerkla lo nuncasnu
15:26 < durka42> xusra lo du'u lo skari cu kulnutli
15:27 < durka42> si klunu'i
15:27 < zipcpi> ua xu srana lo tanbargu
15:27 < durka42> mi na djuno
15:27 < durka42> ti'e casnu vecu'u lo mriste
15:32 < zipcpi> mi na tolcri le nu casnu
15:34 < durka42> it's buried on the "jbonunsla" thread for some reason, .u'i
15:35 < durka42> co'o
15:41 < zipcpi> I can't remember these weird day systems though. I'm very culturally biased toward the number system because of what I learned from Chinese
15:41 < zipcpi> I'm fine with calling Sunday nondei instead of zeldei but that might not work for NLDCMS so well
15:43 < zipcpi> It is based on the rainbow
15:44 < Amnadya> im very used to monday = 1, so it annoys me that ithkuil has sunday as 1. thats just not how i count
15:45 < zipcpi> Yeah
15:45 < zipcpi> Portuguese has sunday = 1 too though
15:47 < zipcpi> NLDCMS is basically a relex of ISO 8601 to be more usable for Lojban
15:49 < zipcpi> So the days of the week is based on their week-year calendar, which uses Monday = 1
16:09 < zipcpi> zo ro'au'o oi
16:17 < zipcpi> Maybe {xe'e} can be thought of as the antithesis of {mo'oi}
16:18 < zipcpi> It specifically says, "hey, {mo'oi} is not a meaningful question here!"
16:18 < zipcpi> And when used as an answer to {mo'oi}, it's like a {na'i}, but with a more specific meaning
16:19 < zipcpi> "Yes, I want apples, but I'm not picky about which ones"
16:26 < Zearen> .i xu ranji fa lonu lojbo tavla do'e la .mymbl.
16:26 < zipcpi> su'oroi
16:29 < zipcpi> {mo'oi}: Please give me more information so I can identify the referent. {xe'e}: I don't care about the specific referent.
16:36 < durka42> I don't understand krtis' la'e'au at all
16:37 < zipcpi> I *think* he means to refer to specific names as grammar systems
16:37 < durka42> but... it's in LAhE
16:37 < zipcpi> So la'e'au la xorlo, la'e'au la tcekitaujau, etc
16:38 < durka42> but
16:38 < durka42> how is {la xorlo} different from {la'e'au la xorlo}
16:38 < zipcpi> It's to make it a sumti, while {jo'au} actually code switches, I think
16:38 < durka42> it differentiates "whatever I am calling Xorlo" from ... something else that I am calling Xorlo?
16:39 < zipcpi> Specifically refer to it as a code I suppose... I dunno. I'd just prefer defining brivla for the codes themselves rather than relying on names, if that is important
16:39 < durka42> he says the referent is (somehow) specified by the grammar
16:39 < durka42> not that the referent is a grammar type?
16:39 < durka42> or maybe he is just spectacularly bad at writing definitions (which he is)
16:40 < zipcpi> Well yeah... he misplaced xu'u'i and xai'a is COI when it should be in UI after all...
16:40 < zipcpi> Or maybe it's something got to do with *shudder* mekso
16:41 < durka42> ohh
16:41 < durka42> JVS only showed me his giant explanatory comment after I posted my own
16:41 < durka42> let's see if it answered any of the questions
16:45 < zipcpi> NLDCMS needs a name... lertideci'e?
16:50 < durka42> what's NLDCMS?
16:50 < zipcpi> lerfu tcita detri
16:50 < durka42> xu zo li'ei pagbu la'e'au la lertideci'e
16:50 < zipcpi> mi na djuno u'i
16:50 < zipcpi> la'a pagbu la xornunsep
16:51 < zipcpi> si'au le du go'i cu zmadu lo ka mapti
17:05 < durka42> zipcpi: btw, in usage youtube is {la dontu'u}, not {la dontivni} :)
17:05 < durka42> and yes that's a malgli cimjvo but it's a cmevla so shut up :)
17:11 < zipcpi> u'i
17:12 < zipcpi> Go ahead and contradict me in the BPFK mriste then
17:14 < zipcpi> See this is exactly why brivlacme need some way to be added
17:14 < zipcpi> Cause I don't know what "usage" was :p
17:15 < durka42> ie
18:35 < zipcpi> lol somehow after reading Curtis' explanation I'm even more confused than before I read it :p
18:39 < zipcpi> And now I have another crazy system for days of the week. soldei and lundei are kept, but then martidei merkudei iovdei vernedei saptudei
18:41 < durka42> everyone should have their own system for days of the week
18:42 < durka42> it's the best way to promote communication
18:42 < zipcpi> u'i
18:42 < zipcpi> I wasn't exactly serious. Still though, the planets may deserve similar names
18:59 < zipcpi> On {ki'o}: I'm not sure how useful it is beyond a short hand anyway, and even then {nonono} is only one syllable longer. I think in both writing and in speech it can be customary to separate the number into easily digestible groups, but it need not be phonemic
19:00 < zipcpi> Another advantage is "solving" the problem as to whether it should be thousand, ten-thousand, or hundred-thousand :p
19:01 < durka42> I thought it was defined to be 1000
19:01 < zipcpi> Yeah it makes sense since it's based on {kilto}
19:02 < zipcpi> It's just, you know, mumblings as to how culturally neutral it is blablabla I don't really have a dog in that fight :p
19:03 < zipcpi> It's just I think {paki'o zemuciki'o pareci} is just wasted syllable
19:03 < durka42> however I don't know how to render "1,200" vs "1,000,200"
19:03 < zipcpi> *s
19:03 < zipcpi> Right
19:03 < durka42> I mean I'm sure the BPFK has specified that somewhere, but it's not in my memory banks
19:03 < zipcpi> xm
19:04 < durka42> I really need to write a bpfk looker-upper for vlaste
19:04 < durka42> vlaste: ki'o (selma'o)
19:04 < vlaste> ki'o (class) = PA3
19:04 < zipcpi> Just override the ma'oste definitions already fe'o :p
19:06 < durka42> iesai
19:06 < durka42> well
19:06 < durka42> that depends on implementing multilingual support in vlasisku
19:06 < durka42> then we just import the BPFK defs as another "language"
19:06 < zipcpi> lol
19:06 < durka42> BPFK English
19:07 < zipcpi> Then tcekitau and all the others lol
19:07 < durka42> pa ki'o recivo ki'o muxaze
19:07 < durka42>     ((1*1000) + 234) * 1000 + 567 = 1234567
19:07 < durka42> ok I can work with that
19:08 < zipcpi> So the "answer" is that 1,000,200 = pa ki'o ki'o renono?
19:08 < zipcpi> Eh, I'd just go pa nonono renono
19:08 < durka42> yes I believe that's correct
19:14 < zipcpi> Or, crazy idea: pa megdo-si nonono renono (optional separator just to let the listener know what order of magnitude you're dealing with :p)
19:16 < durka42> heh
19:36  * nuzba @youxkei: 日本語版sutsisみたいなものってないんですか？ #lojban [http://bit.ly/1CgBDok]
20:05 < xajmi> Hello
20:05 < xajmi> I'm new to the lojban language
20:05 < durka42> coi
20:05 < durka42> Hi!
20:05 < xajmi> but I want to say something in lojban in a video i will be making
20:06 < xajmi> the phrase I want to say is "i am a unicorn"
20:06 < durka42> mi pavyseljirna
20:07 < xajmi> cool... thank you so much!!!
20:08 < xajmi> and how do you say "damn you"
20:08 < durka42> di'ai nai
20:08 < xajmi> *sorry if it is insulting
20:08 < durka42> this sounds like an interesting video... :p
20:08 < durka42> from unicorns to curses
20:09 < vultrue> sounds like pretty typical internet reply
20:09 < vultrue> " @$%& you I'm a dragon!"
20:09 < durka42> hmm
20:09 < durka42> vlaste: dragon
20:09 < vlaste> 7 results: drakono, ranmrdrakono, blurdrakono, finprfikodurusi, finprfilopteriksi, finprsinxnatfinai, ranmi
20:09 < xajmi> hahahaha... yea... it's something funny, I hope it will be popular...
20:09 < durka42> drakono?
20:10 < durka42> di'ai nai .i mi drakono co'o
20:10 < durka42> :)
20:10 < xajmi> hahaha....
20:11 < xajmi> Popo is about to teach you the pecking order...
20:11 < xajmi> :)
20:13 < xajmi> I have a question... Why did letter "h" was omitted from the Lojban language, if it could have been used instead of the " ' "
20:13 < zipcpi> Mostly as a reminder that the morphology doesn't treat it as a true consonant in many ways
20:13 < durka42> it's shorter and it emphasizes the fact that ' isn't really a consonant, just a vowel separator
20:14 < durka42> there is another answer involving Loglan and history, but... who wants to listen to that :)
20:14 < zipcpi> u'i
20:14 < xajmi> OK got it...
20:15 < durka42> also, it enforces cultural neutrality by breaking every command line tool and search engine
20:15 < durka42> zo'o :)
20:15 < zipcpi> u'i
20:17 < xajmi> that is a problem actually... because it is supposed to evolve eventually into acomputer-human language (supposedly), but the charater " ' " is reserved in most programming languages
20:18 < durka42> yeah, but lojban _is_ the language
20:18 < durka42> so no problem
20:20 < xajmi> mmm... I'm not quite convinced... but doesn't matter... it's still a pretty cool language
20:26 < xajmi> Well I bid farewell my friends... I hope the video be good enough, and thanks again
20:26 < durka42> co'o di'ai
20:26 < zipcpi> co'o
20:27 < xajmi> co'o
20:28 < durka42> hopefully he looked up {nai} and didn't think I was saying "bye go to hell" :)
20:28 < zipcpi> u'i
20:29 < zipcpi> lol looking back I can't believe how many iterations {i'au} has gone through
20:29 < niftg> coʰoi
20:30 < zipcpi> VAUhU -> UI(subselma'o uncertain and kept changing) -> TOIhE -> IhAU
20:30 < zipcpi> With IhAU *almost* like VAUhU
20:33 < niftg> .uinai me'oi aspirated me y'ybu na drani ke vidni tolcanci va'o tu'a tinoi ircitci
20:34 < durka42> ja'a tolcanci .i .iunkoda tezu'e lo nu jinga
20:34 < durka42> niftg: http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~aburka/tmp/Screen%20Shot%202015-07-03%20at%2011.34.03%20PM.png
20:34 < niftg> ja'a .ua
20:35 < durka42> .u ʰ
20:35 < fenki> U+02B0 MODIFIER LETTER SMALL H (ʰ)
20:37 < niftg> .uenai ti noi tutci zo'u gau mi la'oi Courier-New ju'ocu'i cu ralju fo'onto gi'e na vasru lo lerfu tarmi vreji pe le fange lerfu
20:37 < zipcpi> .u 象
20:37 < durka42> uinaidai
20:37 < fenki> U+8C61 CJK Ideograph (象)
20:37 < zipcpi> exp: la'oi one-two
20:37 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "t" found.
20:37 < durka42> za'a mi pilno la'ai Lucida Grande le'u
20:37 < zipcpi> za'o gau spofu
20:38 < niftg> exp: la'oi -
20:38 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but end of input found.
20:38 < niftg> exp: zo'oi -
20:38 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but end of input found.
20:39 < niftg> xy'y
20:39 < zipcpi> ca dubji'isre me'o vu'ubu me'o kunti bu
20:40 < niftg> .u'i je'u
20:40 < zipcpi> mi pu djisku lo se du'u lu gleki-sai li'u mu'a cu ei gendra ma'i le gentufa
20:41 < zipcpi> ku'i na drani lo ka .y. se implemente
20:41 < niftg> me'oi Lucida klesi lertai vau ji'a gi'e melbi mi
20:44 < zipcpi> ja'o lo nu mi kargau le moklu cu selja'e lo nu le gentufa cu spofu ru'e
20:48 < niftg> le ki'a .a'u ru'e moklu
20:49 < zipcpi> .y. fu'o pe'a
20:50 < niftg> sei za'u re'u krici mi se mau se pluka tu'a la me'oi Courier co cnino
20:50 < zipcpi> exp: sei za'u re'u krici mi se mau se pluka tu'a la me'oi Courier co cnino
20:50 < mensi> ([sei {<za'u re'u> krici} SEhU] [mi {CU <(¹se mau¹) (¹se pluka¹)> <tu'a (¹la [{me'oi ~} {co cnino}] KU¹) LUhU> VAU}])
20:51 < zipcpi> mi na se slabu le gerna pe zo sei
20:52 < durka42> lo sei zei bridi cu se fanmo lo selbri
20:53 < durka42> no da brirebla
20:53 < zipcpi> xy'y
20:53 < zipcpi> exp: la .frank. cu prami sei la .frank. cu gleki la .djein.
20:53 < mensi> ([la frank KU] [cu {prami <sei (¹[la frank KU] cu¹) gleki SEhU>} {la djein KU} VAU])
20:54 < niftg> su'o da djica lo nu lo brirebla ji'a cu nenri lo sei zei stura
20:54 < niftg> mi no'e go'i
20:54 < zipcpi> ka'e pilno zo be
20:54 < durka42> ro da se djica su'o de
20:55 < zipcpi> mi djica lo ka baze'e daspo lo jbobau iau bu'a'a'a'a'a'azo'o
20:55 < durka42> ro da se djica su'o de .i su'o da djica ro de .i lo pa go'i cu se cmene zo zipcpi
20:56 < zipcpi> :p
20:56 < niftg> ju'o ru'e pu'i gentufa lo gerna poi va'o ke'a curmi lo nu lo sei zei stura cu se nenri la brirebla
20:57 < durka42> zo soi poi cnino cu vasru piro lo'e bridi jecu se famyma'o zo se'u
20:57 < durka42> ja'o ja'a cumki
20:59 < niftg> .ua zo soi noi cnino cu banli zmadu
21:00 < zipcpi> ie .i ku'i mi na djuno lo du'u makau te frica zo xoi
21:00 < durka42> camxes: +exp lo frank cu prami soi la frank cu gleki la djein
21:00 < camxes> ([lo frank KU] [cu {prami <soi (¹[la frank KU] [cu {gleki <la djein KU> VAU}]¹) SEhU> VAU}])
21:00 < durka42> zipcpi: sko'opu po'o frica
21:00 < durka42> camxes: +exp lo frank cu prami xoi la frank cu gleki la djein
21:00 < camxes> ([lo frank KU] [cu {prami <xoi (¹[la frank KU] [cu {gleki <la djein KU> VAU}]¹) SEhU> VAU}])
21:01 < zipcpi> je'u .iku'i mi za'o na jimpe
21:01 < durka42> xu do jimpe lo banxa je carvi mupli
21:02 < zipcpi> ei da uitki mutpapri ko'au lo nu ciksi ju'eije mupli jufra
21:03 < durka42> xunai su'o da mupli ki'oi lo se srana be zo soi poi cnino
21:03 < zipcpi> ki'oi ma
21:04 < zipcpi> mi nitcu lo mupli poi karbi zo xoi zo soi
21:04 < durka42> ki'oi zoi urli http://mw.lojban.org/papri/new_soi urli
21:04 < zipcpi> je'e mi pu viska
21:05 < durka42> zo soi simsa zo xoi va'o lo nu muvdu lo tolfa'o be lo jufra
21:06 < zipcpi> xy'y xu zo xoi .y. kansele le sko'opu
21:06 < durka42> na go'i
21:06 < durka42> zo xoi zbasu lo cnino sko'opu
21:06 < zipcpi> uaru'e
21:07 < durka42> zo xoi dunli lo sumtcita lo ka sko'opu zbasu
21:07 < zipcpi> ma me le mupli pe le'i mutpapri ge'u poi ka'e arco le te frica
21:09  * nuzba @bripre: @youxkei .e'u pilno la'e di'e i zoizoi http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/ja/ zoi #lojban [http://bit.ly/1CgHdqE]
21:10 < durka42> pe'i le romoi mupli cu .arco
21:10 < zipcpi> lu <su'o prenu soi nu na pairnu'i cu xusra lo du'u ro jbopre cu lazni> li'u zo'u: xu zo xoi jai gau frica
21:11 < durka42> cmalu te frica
21:12 < durka42> nu na pairnu'i kei fa lo nu su'o prenu ...
21:18 < zipcpi> le lobyuitki mutpapri pe zo xoi za'o arco lo laldo smuni
21:19 < durka42> oi
21:19 < zipcpi> smudu'i zo va'ei u'i
21:33 < zipcpi> exp: su'o prenu soi nu na pairnu'i cu xusra lo du'u ro jbopre cu lazni
21:33 < mensi> ([{<su'o BOI> prenu KU} {soi <CU (¹nu [CU {na pairnu'i} VAU] KEI¹) VAU> SEhU}] [cu {xusra <lo (¹du'u [{<ro BOI> jbopre KU} {cu <lazni VAU>}] KEI¹) KU> VAU}])
21:33 < zipcpi> exp: su'o prenu xoi nu na pairnu'i cu xusra lo du'u ro jbopre cu lazni
21:33 < mensi> ([{<su'o BOI> prenu KU} {xoi <CU (¹nu [CU {na pairnu'i} VAU] KEI¹) VAU> SEhU}] [cu {xusra <lo (¹du'u [{<ro BOI> jbopre KU} {cu <lazni VAU>}] KEI¹) KU> VAU}])
21:34 < zipcpi> tersmus: su'o prenu soi nu na pairnu'i cu xusra lo du'u ro jbopre cu lazni
21:34 < tersmus> Parse error at 15
21:34 < zipcpi> tersmus: su'o prenu xoi nu na pairnu'i cu xusra lo du'u ro jbopre cu lazni
21:34 < tersmus> Parse error at 11
21:34 < zipcpi> oi
21:35 < zipcpi> lu <do pu ga'orgau lo canko soi mi pacna> li'u zo'u: .y. mi pu ji ca pacna
21:36 < zipcpi> tersmus: do pu ga'orgau lo canko soi mi pacna
21:36 < tersmus> <canko(_)><pacna>(c0);  (pu)(). ga'orgau(do,c0)
21:36 < zipcpi> tersums: do pu ga'orgau lo canko xoi mi pacna
21:36 < zipcpi> tersmus: do pu ga'orgau lo canko xoi mi pacna
21:36 < tersmus> Parse error at 24
21:36 < zipcpi> na nelci zo xoi li'a
21:36 < mensi> e'u do vrude pajni gi'e nai ze'i co'a cinmo lo ka nelci
21:38 < zipcpi> tersmus: mi pacna lo nu do pu ga'orgau lo canko
21:38 < tersmus> nu[(pu)(). ga'orgau(do,c0)](c1);  canko(c0);  pacna(mi,c1)
21:38 < niftg> la mensi ca'o za'a farvi
21:38 < zipcpi> ie
21:40 < niftg> ma poi gentufa cu se pilno la tersmu vau .a'u
21:41 < zipcpi> ju'oinai .i mi na djuno
21:41 < durka42> mi puzu retsku .i ju'ocu'i sepli jecu simsa la camxes
21:43 < niftg> la'a lo nu sepli cu sarcu
21:44 < niftg> ta'o .ua zo ju'oi pu co'a pagbu la jbovlaste
21:45 < durka42> puzuku zo ju'oi se smuni lu ju'o cu'i li'u
21:45 < zipcpi> u'i
21:45 < durka42> ca lo drata pu se smuni lo simsa be zo zo'oi
21:45 < durka42> nau smuni ... .i ju'oinai .u'i
21:45 < niftg> kibro ra'u judri me zo'oi
21:46 < niftg> sa'e me zo zo'oi
21:48 < niftg> ju'oi cu'i
21:51 < zipcpi> zo ju'oi sinxa lo du'u le cusku cu djuno lo du'u le bridi cu jetnu kei a le danfu be le preti poi ga cy spuda ke'a gi gau cy zo kau tcita ke'a
21:51 < zipcpi> ju'oi .i mi djuno
21:51 < zipcpi> ju'oinai .i mi na djuno
21:52 < zipcpi> ju'oicu'i .i .y. mi no'e djuno iau ju'ocu'i
21:53 < niftg> .io zasni finti lo jbovelckijufra
22:12 < zipcpi> mi na broda xoi brode = I don't (broda brode-ly), mi na broda soi brode = I (don't broda) brode-ly ?
22:15 < gleki> ei mi bregau lo cnino vlaste pe xau lo gloso tutci
23:18 < gleki> gloss: lo melbi dansu cu dansu
23:18 < mensi> A(n) handsome dancer(s): dance(s)
23:19 < gleki> the first primitive noun detection! yay!
23:30 < noncomcinse> coi
--- Day changed Sat Jul 04 2015
00:06 < vultrue> coi teleko
00:06 < noncomcinse> [alureon]: coi
00:06 < noncomcinse> s/[alureon]: //
00:06 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: coi
00:12 < gleki> coi
00:13 < gleki> gloss: lo melbi klama cu klama
00:13 < mensi> A(n) handsome comer: come(s)
01:44 < gleki> exp: lo mlatu pe klama
01:44 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "k" found.
01:44 < gleki> what it could even mean
01:45 < gleki> pe => poi co'e
01:45 < gleki> lo mlatu poi co'e vau cu klama?
01:46 < gleki> co'e is co'ephorics, right?
01:58 < gleki> alta: lo mlatu pe klama
01:58 < mensi> ([FA {lo <(¹mlatu NF¹) (¹pe [FIhA KU] GEhU¹)> KU}] [CU {klama NF} VAU])
02:04 < gleki> mensi: doi mand mi fircku spusku fi do
02:04 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.mand.gy. di'a cusku da
03:19  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa menli fa
03:27  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa menli fa
03:28  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa menli fa
03:38  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa akti fa
03:38  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa akti fa
03:49  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa menli fa
04:24 < Amnadya2> coi
04:37 < Amnadya> veni vidi vitci falo kibro
04:37 < mensi> Amnadya: cu'u la'o gy.nwofdlfn.gy.: 11:04 <gleki> mensi: doi mand mi fircku spusku fi do | 2015-07-04T11:26:12.
04:37 < mensi> 422Z
04:42  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa menli fa
04:45  * nuzba @okau_junpe: sutysisku日本語のこの文章の翻訳に関わった記憶があるけど、これはまずい翻訳ではないだろうか？ #ロジバン    mi pu fanva lo jufra soi morji .i fanva fu lo mabla ju'oru'e    http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/ja/ [http://bit.ly/1H5WEk4]
04:46 < ctefaho> coi
04:54 < Zearen> .i coi
05:20  * nuzba @sneubalhon: ct, 電腦版。  http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=Presenting_Lojban&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop [http://bit.ly/1TbRNTT]
05:27 < Ilmen> coi
05:29 < ctefaho> xoi Ilmen
05:34 < zipcpi> Yeah, I think maybe the lerfu system is the best for shorthand systems with their own defined grammar. Heck it's so flexible. 24 letters not enough? Use any old word + bu
05:35 < zipcpi> They can be brivla, or they can be any old cmavo that reminds one of that brivla. Who cares what the cmavo actually mean? For example an alternative to NLDCMS could use na'abu, ma'ibu, de'ibu, etc
05:36 < zipcpi> deibu
05:37 < zipcpi> Maybe all that is needed is something that turn any old word into a PA. And one that semantically turns one into a VUhU... but I don't really care about enforcing mekso grammar anymore
05:39 < zipcpi> exp: fa'obu
05:40 < mensi> (fa'o bu)
05:40 < zipcpi> ... hm not good. We'd need to compile a list of "bad words" :p
05:40 < zipcpi> Probably zo and zei too
05:41 < zipcpi> exp: ki'a'aibu
05:41 < mensi> ([{ki'a'ai bu} BOI] VAU)
05:42 < zipcpi> Ah... small problem... it means for every "magic word" we coin, like go'oi or ze'oi, there is a small chance of breaking some nonce {bu} somewhere
05:44 < zipcpi> Maybe a special {lo'u... le'u} is better
05:51  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa niftyg fa
06:02 < samcinki> I'm jundi-ing Mumble, if anyone is interested.
06:04  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa zipcpi fa
06:09 < gleki> yes, for Mayan system the prefixes would be {kin bu} etc.
06:09 < zipcpi> Yeah maybe cmevla is safer
06:09 < gleki> btw in voice chats {co'o pei}, {fe'o pei}, {je'e pei} would be more used than today
06:10 < zipcpi> ua
06:10 < zipcpi> I do use {je'epei}
06:10 < gleki> co'o/fe'o pei ~= Anything else you want to add or we finish the conversation? - co'o ~= No, goodbye, i have nothing to add
06:12  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa akti fa
06:13 < zipcpi> I use {je'epei} as shorthand for {xu do jimpe fi le se cusku be mi}
06:14  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa niek fa
06:14  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa niek fa
06:22  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa gunro fa
06:32  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Zearen fa
06:34  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Zearen fa
06:35  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ziren fa
06:48  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa akti fa
07:05  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa akti fa
07:08  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa menli fa
07:15  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
07:19  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa akti fa
07:19  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ziren fa
07:30 < zipcpi> exp: pe'a plipe jebabo cu plipe jebabo cu farlu lo kevna
07:30 < mensi> (pe'a [CU {plipe VAU} {je ba} bo {cu <plipe VAU> <je ba> bo <cu (¹farlu [lo kevna KU] VAU¹)> VAU} VAU])
07:31 < gleki> wow wow wow
07:32 < zipcpi> vau vau vau?
07:32 < gleki> yacc: 
07:32 < mensi> /FA'O/
07:32 < gleki> yacc: pe'a plipe jebabo cu plipe jebabo cu farlu lo kevna
07:32 < gleki> yacc: pe'a plipe jebabo plipe jebabo farlu lo kevna
07:32 < mensi> (pe'a {<plipe [je ba bo] [plipe (je ba bo) farlu]> <[lo kevna KU] VAU>})
07:32 < cliva> yacc: pe'a plipe gi'e ba bo plipe gi'e ba bo farlu lo kevna
07:32 < mensi> (pe'a {<plipe VAU> <gi'e ba bo> <[plipe VAU] [gi'e ba bo] [farlu ({lo kevna KU} VAU)] VAU> VAU})
07:33 < gleki> la'a lo vlaste pe la bangu ba prane zmadu fukpi la jbovlaste
07:33 < gleki> i sa'u mi ba jmina lo ralju be na valsi
07:38 < gleki> en: ambigu
07:38 < latro`a> coi
07:38 < cliva> màsnò
07:38 < cliva> sei na gendra
07:38 < cliva> coi
07:38 < mensi> ambigu = x1 is ambiguous, possibly being x2 (ka) or x3 (ka), this being hard to x4 (2-place ka) |>>> Near-synonyms:
07:38 < mensi> ambigu'o, smuvrici |>>> spheniscine
07:38 < gleki> zipcpi: why x2 and x3 are such? what if >2 meanings
07:39 < gleki> x1 is ambiguous, possibly being x2 (plural of ka)...
07:39 < zipcpi> Not me; I only translated selpa'i-s def
07:39 < gleki> en: ambigu'o
07:39 < mensi> ambigu'o = x1 is ambiguous, open to interpretations x2 (plural of property of x1) |>>> See smuni, sinxa |>>>
07:39 < mensi> gleki
07:39 < gleki> i'e doi la gleki
07:40 < zipcpi> u'i
07:40 < gleki> what are possible examples of ambigu4?
07:41 < gleki> dont offer {la samtin}and {zo'e}
07:41 < cliva> latro`a: lo terjoma nu me'oi fold zo'u xu zo mei'e jo'u lo da'i cnino brivla cu jai banzu
07:41 < cliva> jbo: ambigu
07:41 < gleki> en: terjoma
07:41 < mensi> ambigu = x1 ka'e ckaji x2 ja x3 .i lo du'u x1 ckaji x2 ji kau x3 na jai frili fai lo ka ce'u ce'u me'au x4 me'u noi me
07:41 < mensi> lo ka ganse jo'u lo ka te smuni jo'u lo simsa |>>> ko catlu zo smunambigu je zo smuvrici je zo sorselsmu |>>>
07:41 < mensi> selpahi
07:41 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
07:41 < cliva> jbo:terjoma
07:41 < mensi> terjoma = x1 terjonma'o x2 boi x3 boi x4 boi x5
07:41 < zipcpi> I don't know either lol I even mistranslated it as ma'i
07:41 < zipcpi> Someone then corrected it
07:42 < cliva> .i mu'a lo di'u velcki cu jai mukti lo nu mi pilno zo ke'a ne ka'ai zo jai
07:42 < cliva> vau vau ta'o
07:44 < zipcpi> Like I said, didn't write that def, only translated it
07:44 < zipcpi> I do think I like your terbri better
07:44 < zipcpi> But {ambigu} sees more use, probably because of length
07:45 < cliva> .oi la korpora za'o na se cikre fi lo ka se pi'o ce'u sisku lo ka mupli lo valsi poi se tolfa'o lo karsna
07:47  * la_kristan may be disconnected without notice at any time.
07:48 < la_kristan> .i coi rodo
07:49 < cliva> coi
07:49  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa menli fa
07:50  * la_kristan puzi mo'u tcidu la'o zoi gy. Lojban for Beginners .gy
07:51 < cliva> .u'a dai (to .e'u vimcu zo zoi toi)
07:52  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa niftyg fa
07:52  * la_kristan puzi mo'u tcidu la'o gy. Lojban for Beginners .gy
07:53 < la_kristan> like that?
07:53 < cliva> go'i
07:55 < la_kristan> I just started a Memrise course to learn all the gismu,
07:56 < la_kristan> but it's kinda big to download for offline access.
07:58 < zipcpi> I don't bother memorizing, I just use, but to each their own
08:00  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa zipcpi fa
08:01 < cliva> I did need flashcards at the beginning, but once I had enough to guess unknown words from context I abandoned them
08:03 < zipcpi> They say vocabulary is like Pokemon. You encounter a word in the wild, then catch it :p
08:03 < cliva> ta'o nai there's also Anki, with the gismu deck being 4 MB: https://ankiweb.net/shared/info/2744730295
08:04 < cliva> (the speech synthesizer there is horrible though: x and ' pronounced the same for example)
08:04 < zipcpi> u'i
08:04 < zipcpi> pa'a paxa pa'a paxa pa'a paxa
08:04  * clakre wrote a randomized-position cloze generator to make an anki deck
08:05 < cliva> no wait, they're different, but only enough to tell them apart when it says "pa'a paxa pa'a paxa"
08:08 < gleki> there is a set of manually uttered gismu
08:09 < gleki> there was a project
08:09 < gleki> no idea where those recordings are now
08:09 < la_kristan> I've never used anki
08:10 < la_kristan> I've always used Memrise, as evidenced by my Membrain rank.
08:10 < gleki> what is the best language learning course on memrise in ur opinion?
08:11 < la_kristan> I don't know; I haven't tried all language learning courses on Memrise.
08:12 < gleki> la_kristan: what about those that u tried. what was the best?
08:13 < la_kristan> for any language, or one in particular?
08:13 < gleki> for any language
08:14 < la_kristan> apart from one Esperanto vocab course that had some spelling errors, they've all been pretty good.
08:15 < gleki> la_kristan: have u tried any courses not only with individual words but with examples where the complexity of sentences grows from  level to level?
08:16 < la_kristan> although the problem with Memrise, is that it can't get it through its head that the presence and location of . and ' actually matters!
08:17 < la_kristan> I can write "ee" instead of .e'e and it will accept it!
08:18 < la_kristan> or 'e.e or '''...ee or whatever!
08:18 < zipcpi> u'i
08:18 < gleki> la_kristan: have u registered and followed this? area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
08:18 < zipcpi> . actually doesn't matter for parsing
08:19 < la_kristan> oh, yeah, I did the Basic Russian course, it had sentences.
08:19 < zipcpi> Only matters in speech
08:20 < Zearen> Well, It matters little.  E.g. «cy.co'e» ≠ «cyco'e», but typical style would use a space.
08:20 < la_kristan> gleki , No, I haven't seen that.
08:21 < gleki> la_kristan: also please upvote any 5 questions with rating below 10
08:21 < Zearen> I personally try to be denpa bu drani just to assure I remember where they go.
08:22 < la_kristan> zipcpi: it matters when I'm already having trouble remembering .ue and .u'e
08:22 < zipcpi> No, not the apostrophe, that one definitely matters
08:22 < la_kristan> and it tells me I'm right when I get the wrong one.
08:22 < gleki> english is also affected then since "its" and "it's" have different meanings
08:23 < gleki> maybe we need a course where ' is replaced with h
08:24 < la_kristan> maybe Memrise should pay attention to apostrophes.
08:24 < gleki> you may open a new discussion
08:25 < la_kristan> I don't know much about that; I just use the Android app.
08:26 < la_kristan> all the discussions are just "behind the scenes " to me
08:30  * la_kristan may be disconnected at any time without notice.
08:31 < la_kristan> In case you didn't get the first notice.
08:32 < la_kristan> .i ca lo cabdei lo merko cu salci
08:33 < la_kristan> is it lo cabdei or le cabdei
08:33 < la_kristan> ?
08:33 < cliva> ba'a nai ru'e there is an option for authors on Memrise to control which characters are whitespace
08:34 < gleki> la_kristan: {lo cabdei} is definitely correct here
08:35 < la_kristan> it was le cabdei in L4B, but that seemed weird.
08:36 < la_kristan> since it /is/ today, not just what I call today.
08:36 < zipcpi> Ah... that veridicality thing doesn't really apply anymore
08:37 < zipcpi> I'd tend to use le, because it's the cabdei in reference to something, but lo won't be wrong either
08:38 < la_kristan> I've been making mental note of rhyming gismu...
08:39 < la_kristan> but the fact that salci rhymes with kalci doesn't strike me as useful.
08:39 < zipcpi> u'i
08:39 < zipcpi> I found Lojban hard to rhyme with; I just settle for rhyming the last syllable
08:40 < la_kristan> palci might usefully rhyme with either...
08:40 < zipcpi> Part of it though is that my vocab isn't that great
08:40 < la_kristan> .i mi zanru lo tanru
08:41 < zipcpi> Well, there's a little thing you should know called "xorlo", post that, {lo} is just a generic "convert selbri into sumti"
08:41 < la_kristan> .i mi prami le skami
08:42 < zipcpi> Instead of making any existential claim like su'o da poi broda
08:42 < la_kristan> well, I read about xorlo; but I thought things were still supposed to actually be the thing in question, in some way
08:43 < la_kristan> even if it's just bear goo...
08:43 < zipcpi> lol
08:43 < la_kristan> it's still a bear, somehow
08:44 < zipcpi> There are many ways to disassociate one from a description... pe'a, ba'u, even ju'acu'i (rather recently invented compound{
08:45 < zipcpi> Well, my current opinion is that it may not be {ca'a cribe}, but it's {pu/ba'o cribe}, and tenses can be elided given sufficient context
08:45 < clakre> near-rhymes and other assonances seem more useful than last-syllable rhymes
08:45 < zipcpi> Well I did try near rhymes
08:45 < clakre> maybe we should be making alliterative poetry zo'o
08:45 < zipcpi> But then I failed to keep it up
08:46 < la_kristan> zbasu and smacu don't rhyme, but they're close enough.
08:46 < zipcpi> Anyway the meter of the song I translated stressed the last syllable, even though that's "wrong" strictly speaking
08:47 < cliva> ZA'O has lots of words broken up by pauses, just to keep the rhyme
08:47 < zipcpi> But what can be done about that, save rewriting the entire song
08:48 < la_kristan> so, nowadays, do people still usually say "ro lo [insert brivla here]"?
08:49 < zipcpi> Yes... it means "all of the" or "all of some"
08:49 < la_kristan> cliva: yeah, I noticed that.
08:49 < cliva> "ro lo broda" still exists, but doesn't mean the same as "ro broda" anymore
08:49 < zipcpi> Yep
08:50 < la_kristan> cliva: about the album, that is.
08:50 < gleki> indeed we need a tool to recreate rhyming dictionary automatically
08:51 < la_kristan> and "lo ro broda" means... ?
08:52 < zipcpi> The brodas / some brodas which number all
08:52 < cliva> everything that brodas, but not necessarily distributively
08:52 < la_kristan> I actually purchased ZA'O
08:52 < zipcpi> But what's nice is tha lo mu broda no longer means "all the brodas in the universe, which number five", which is... rather difficult to use :p
08:53 < cliva> "lo ro prenu poi zvati ti cu bevri lo pipno": everyone who is here carries a piano (it could be each carrying one individually, or all of them together)
08:53 < la_kristan> distributively ki'a
08:53 < zipcpi> Ah... poi zvati... clever. I would've had a hard time coming up with a use case on the spot for lo ro broda
08:55 < la_kristan> and "ro lo broda poi zvati ti"?
08:55 < la_kristan> what's the difference then?
08:56 < zipcpi> Not much, the elided place is zo'e
08:56 < zipcpi> Oh wait
08:56 < zipcpi> Now it's an outer quantifier
08:56 < zipcpi> So it will be definitely distributive
08:56 < la_kristan> I purchased the whole album, just so I could read the lyrics to "nasa"
08:57 < zipcpi> I'll probably need to purchase it to analyze the lyrics at all
08:57 < zipcpi> I'm horrible at interpreting lyrics. That XKCD comic is so me
08:57 < la_kristan> I still don't know what you mean by "distributive"
08:57 < zipcpi> In English even, there's no need to mention Lojban
08:58 < zipcpi> Meaning individually
08:58 < la_kristan> what XKCD comic?
08:58 < dutchie> https://xkcd.com/1538/ i assume
08:58 < zipcpi> ro lo prenu poi zvati cu bevri lo pipno, implies that each person carried a/some pianos
08:58 < la_kristan> so, with ro first, they each carry a piano?
08:58 < zipcpi> Yep
08:59 < la_kristan> or more than one, lol
08:59 < zipcpi> Yeah
09:00 < la_kristan> about the comic; I can totally relate to that :-D
09:01 < la_kristan> no matter what language the lyrics are in.
09:02 < la_kristan> but sometimes someone does a remake of a song and I'm like "so that's what they were saying!"
09:04  * nuzba @uitki: L17-01 - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/L17-01 by Gleki - /* Vehicles */ [http://bit.ly/1KASW60]
09:04  * la_kristan is very annoyed when recent apps shows apps used a week ago, but not ones used two minutes ago.
09:06  * la_kristan is afk (and could still be suddenly disconnected at any time)
09:12 < la_kristan> if you need me, mention my name and my phone will buzz.
09:18  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
09:18  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
09:18  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
09:20  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa niek fa
09:21  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa niek fa
09:21 < niek> Boop.
09:39  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa gunro fa
09:43 < gleki> coi
09:44 < gleki> i fi'a ma cu'e mo
09:56 < zipcpi> fi'a ma cu'e pai'e mo pei'a pei
09:56 < zipcpi> xo
10:01  * la_kristan is still trying to figure out how to say "fireworks" in toki pona
10:01 < la_kristan> ijo pi suno seli musi
10:01 < la_kristan> maybe?
10:13  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa menli fa
10:24 < gleki> i guess John Clifford on Facebook can answer your question
10:25 < la_kristan> gleki: so what is this stackexchange thing?
10:26 < gleki> a new place for lojban. if we get 230 more upvotes StackExchange will create a new domain for us
10:27 < gleki> we already got 70 followers but few of them upvoted
10:27 < la_kristan> oh. I see questions and answers.
10:27 < gleki> yes, we need to upvote those that are below 10 in rating
10:27 < gleki> first register then you can upvote
10:27 < la_kristan> but not anything for answering questions.
10:27 < gleki> you need to login to answer them
10:28 < la_kristan> okay, I'm logged in, but I still don't see it...
10:29 < la_kristan> and I confirmed the email
10:29 < gleki> "add comment"
10:29 < gleki> to create a new question there is "Propose an example question:
10:29 < gleki> "
10:29 < gleki> in the footer
10:30 < gleki> you might need to follow this section
10:30 < la_kristan> oh, I see. and what is the significance of this new domain?
10:31 < Luluf> coi
10:31 < gleki> well, some people prefer such type of websites.
10:32 < gleki> there are no universal methods of learning languages so the more options we provide the better
10:37 < astroendjisai> .i coi .i mi ctuca mi fo lo lojbo ku
10:38 < astroendjisai> If what I just said was wrong please correct me
10:38 < gleki> fine.
10:39 < gleki> although {mi tadni la .lojban.} = "I study Lojban" might be an easier option :)
10:40 < astroendjisai> Ah, cool. .ui la'edi'u pluka mi
10:40 < gleki> ui dai
10:42 < la_kristan> gleki: so I click the up arrow?
10:43 < la_kristan> if the number isn't 10?
10:45 < la_kristan> be'e la gleki
10:47  * nuzba @s_i_d_a: noda djuno lo    du'u drudi je loldi    .i ma'a dandu    #lojban #haiku [http://bit.ly/1LOW66t]
10:48 < la_kristan> that reminds me...
10:48 < la_kristan> there's a line in the song "nasa"
10:48 < la_kristan> that goes ".i noda djuno lo du da klama ma kau"
10:49 < la_kristan> shouldn't it be "du'u", not "du"?
10:52 < la_kristan> gleki, you there? I asked you about the upvoting.
10:56 < samcinki> "du" replaces "du'u" in cekitau
10:57 < la_kristan> haiku:
10:57 < la_kristan> doi selbeiskami/
10:57 < la_kristan> do mutce melbi blanu/
10:57 < la_kristan> .i mi nelci do
10:57 < la_kristan> samcinki: huh? what's that?
10:59 < la_kristan> and WHERE is gleki? he's not responding!
10:59 < la_kristan> cekitau ki'a
11:00 < latro`a> la_kristan, there's a "dialect" of late, commonly called ce ki tau jau, which switches out some common CV'V with similar-sounding uncommon CV
11:00 < la_kristan> weird.
11:01 < latro`a> the main four are ce'u<->ce, ke'a<->ki, tu'a<->tau, jo'u<->jau
11:01 < latro`a> and sometimes du'u<->du
11:02 < Amnadya> coi
11:02 < la_kristan> why? they don't mean the same thing.
11:02 < latro`a> not making them interchangeable, just reversing their roles
11:03 < latro`a> because the longer ones are much more frequently used
11:03 < latro`a> (in the case of ce'u and jo'u, because of recent changes)
11:03 < latro`a> *recentish
11:03 < la_kristan> but that just sounds confusing.
11:04 < latro`a> who wrote the song?
11:04 < la_kristan> changes? aren't there enough of those already?
11:04 < la_kristan> djemynai
11:04 < latro`a> these aren't changes to the language itself but more to usage
11:05 < latro`a> and yeah, that's what I figured
11:05 < latro`a> for instance ce'u was not really expected to be a common word, especially not a common word used multiple times in a row, when the CLL was written
11:05 < latro`a> which is presumably why it got relegated to CV'V space
11:06  * la_kristan looks up ce'u
11:06 < Amnadya> It seems jau hasnt caught on, but some now use joi instead of johu.
11:06 < latro`a> ce'u isn't very clear in the ma'oste
11:06 < latro`a> ce'u is a word that's hard to put in the ma'oste because you can't use it in isolation
11:07 < latro`a> it needs {ka} (or sometimes {ni}) to even make sense, and you need an appropriate brivla to understand why you would want that anyway
11:07  * la_kristan doesn't feel very enlightened by the definition.
11:07 < latro`a> let me try to give an example to help
11:07 < latro`a> mi do dunli lo ka ce'u tadni la lojban
11:07 < Amnadya> The cmavo definitions arent always that great. There was actually a character limit
11:07 < latro`a> this literally reads "you and I are equivalent in the property "x1 studies Lojban""
11:08 < la_kristan> oh, character limit. that does explain a lot.
11:08 < latro`a> the {ce'u} gives the place that the sumti substituted into the ka gets substituted into
11:08 < latro`a> in {dunli}, what's going on is that the truth value when you substitute in dunli1 is the same as the truth value when you substitute in dunli2
11:09 < latro`a> so "both of us study lojban or neither of us study lojban"
11:09 < latro`a> is a more idiomatic translation of my example
11:09 < la_kristan> oh, yeah, I think I remember reading about ka and ce'u
11:09 < latro`a> there are quite a few gismu with places like this, and more recently we've discovered that quite a few gismu that weren't *defined* this way should have been, such as {kakne}
11:10 < latro`a> tsani's example is that {mi kakne lo nu do citka lo plise} makes no sense
11:10 < latro`a> kakne2 as nu only makes sense when kakne1 is in the nu
11:10 < la_kristan> hmm, I see
11:10 < latro`a> which is a constraint that can be made *explicit* by using ka/ce'u instead
11:11 < la_kristan> ah.
11:12 < la_kristan> mi kakne lo ka lo gerku citka ce'u
11:12 < latro`a> you missed a ku/cu, but yes; "I can be eaten by a dog"
11:13 < la_kristan> oh man, I keep doing that!
11:14 < la_kristan> I'm having a harder time remembering to put cu where I need it, than I ever had with the Esperanto accusative case!
11:15 < durka42> coi'oi'oi'oi
11:16 < mjhat> Hi there ,I like to learn my first conlang lojban.I already know tamil and english.so far neither i can find a consistent tutorial nor a clear path or procedure to learn .there is laot going on in the community like the grammer changing. can anyone clearly tell me what to learn
11:17 < la_kristan> mjhat : quite a few people recommend the Wave Lessons
11:17 < la_kristan> I totally understand the frustration!
11:17 < mjhat> thank you does that follow cll1.1
11:18 < la_kristan> it's supposed to be more up-to-date, with dotside and whatever.
11:19 < la_kristan> but I never used it, so I don't know a whole lot about it.
11:21 < la_kristan> I just did Lojban for Beginners, and then got told how shakespearean my speech was.
11:22 < mjhat> http://vrici.lojban.org/~rlpowell/media/public/cll_prince_for_lsi_2015-03-15.pdf.  Is this the new grammer when it will be published.Should i follow it.
11:22 < la_kristan> actually, I still have the excercises for the last lesson left to do...
11:23 < gleki> la_kristan: you click up if the number is below 10
11:23 < la_kristan> yay! he's alive!
11:24 < gleki> mjhat: mw.lojban.org/papri/Learning/en
11:24 < gleki> mjhat: choose some course there and then ask questions here anytime
11:24 < latro`a> la_kristan, it's not very weird, only the le usage sounds funny these days
11:25 < latro`a> the recent stuff is more minor than we make it out to be
11:25 < la_kristan> gleki: okay. I'm still not totally sure what that's supposed to accomplish, but I like to help people however I can...
11:25 < gleki> as for {ce'u} if you understand {ke'a} then you will understand {ce'u}
11:25 < gleki> la_kristan: yes, we just need upvotes to show admins that people are interested in lojban
11:26 < gleki> a protection from spammers i guess
11:26 < la_kristan> yeah, I just forgot what ce'u means; I understand it okay.
11:27 < mjhat> Yes,thank you .But those lessons are based on the old grammer right
11:28 < la_kristan> now I've apparently run out of upvotes.
11:28 < gleki> mjhat: The Crash Course although incomplete is more about the current grammar
11:29 < gleki> the two grammars are still very similar.
11:29 < gleki> la_kristan: yeah, you have only 5
11:29 < mjhat> thank you very much
11:29 < gleki> la_kristan: and if i stop replying it mean im afk. my account is connected 24/7
11:29 < gleki> to this channel
11:29 < la_kristan> well, I've given them, hope it helps...
11:30 < la_kristan> gleki: oh I see.
11:30 < gleki> e.g. im gonna sleep in ~1-2 hours
11:31 < la_kristan> oh, what time is it? it's 12:31 here.
11:31 < gleki> "A True Lojban Moment" story by selrun is now top3 of all time on reddit
11:32 < la_kristan> oh, I'm not on reddit, but that sounds interesting.
11:32 < gleki> I work in retail, and at night not much happens. I was going about my business, doing the little jobs that need to be done when there are no customers, and I was humming a lojban tune to myself. After a while, I tried to compose my own verses, which had me thinking in lojban. Then a customer walked through the door, and I almost said, "coi la ...". The only thing that stopped me was that I did not know their
11:32 < gleki>  name, and then I realized what had almost happened. Without any conscious effort, my mind was acting in lojban. It was an awesome moment!
11:33 < gleki> i sampu lisri
11:34 < la_kristan> oh, that happend to me quite a bit with Esperanto.
11:34 < la_kristan> */happend/happens
11:37 < gleki> klare
11:37 < _mukti_> coi la gleki
11:38 < la_kristan> I tend to think in Esperanto, and if someone suddenly addresses me, I usually just look at them blankly for a moment, because the response comes to mind in Esperanto, and it takes a bit for me to get back to English,
11:38 < la_kristan> and by then the person's moved on.
11:39 < durka42> coi la mukti noi ca nau kansa mi lo ka viska makau poi jbovlaste kibzva
11:39 < _mukti_> coi .u'i la durkavore
11:39 < mjhat> hey glekii came across
11:39 < mjhat>  The La Gleki's
11:39 < mjhat> Crash Course in Lojban
11:39 < mjhat> The guide to the naturalistic logical language
11:39 < mjhat> Published 2016" Is it okay to learn from that.
11:39 < _mukti_> .i ie mi djica lo ka kansa do
11:40 < dutchie> coi rodo
11:40 < Amnadya> coi
11:40 < _mukti_> coi la nederland
11:41 < _mukti_> coi la'o zoi amnadya zoi
11:41 < durka42> mjhat: that looks like the Crash Course yep
11:44 < _mukti_> Gleki: I'm looking at this bug: https://github.com/lojban/jbovlaste/issues/182
11:44 < _mukti_> I was able to download the XML export in Safari, and I'm not seeing the issue. Do you have Safari?
11:45 < _mukti_> Which is to say, I see the XML as rendered via the XSLT stylesheet.
11:45 < la_kristan> what's the difference between the 2nd edition cll and the one I've got?
11:46 < durka42> the one you have exists
11:46 < _mukti_> la_kristan: Still being worked out, but the 2nd edition will include some corrections
11:46 < durka42> CLL v1.1 is coming soon with just corrections but no real content changes
11:46 < la_kristan> oh, okay.
11:47 < la_kristan> when I look at the original cll pdf on my phone, the formatting is garbled.
11:47 < la_kristan> mostly the examples
11:47 < durka42> hmm
11:48 < la_kristan> many are illegible.
11:48 < durka42> I'm generally suspicious of phone PDF viewers...
11:48 < mjhat> I've read that xorlo are the changes when are they going to be included.
11:49 < durka42> xorlo is a very old change by now, it's included in the crash course
11:49 < durka42> but not yet in the CLL
11:49 < durka42> la_kristan: here is an up-to-date PDF of just chapter 1, see how the examples look http://alexburka.com/lojban/cll_1.pdf
11:49 < _mukti_> mjhat: Great question, mjhat. I think we're collectively waiting on someone to take the bull by the horns the way that John Cowan did.
11:50 < durka42> la_kristan: actually, chapter 1 doesn't have any examples. look at chapter 2 http://alexburka.com/lojban/cll_2.pdf
11:51 < durka42> I hope that as soon as CLL 1.1 is out the door, we can get to work on the new gadri chapter
11:51 < mjhat> Does cll1.1 include xorlo
11:52 < durka42> no
11:52 < durka42> just formatting and corrections
11:52 < durka42> _mukti_: re bug 182, if you save the page as a "web archive" it is indeed corrupted. but if you save as "page source" it is fine
11:53 < _mukti_> Hmm. I wonder what it means to save an XML/XSLT page as a "web archive".
11:53 < durka42> not a whole lot, apparently :)
11:53 < _mukti_> Does it try to save it as HTML ?
11:53 < durka42> I think it tries to save the HTML that it rendered, yeah
11:53 < _mukti_> Hmm. Far be it from me to suggest that Jbovlaste is not riddled by bugs, but I don't think that one is ours.
11:54 < _mukti_> Which is to say, we're not serving HTML, so if the browser tries to save HTML, it's doing something more than we contracted.
11:54 < durka42> I agree, but is there a way to hint to the client that it should download this document and not try to display it?
11:54 < _mukti_> I'll research that.
11:54 < durka42> you can't right click save target as, because there's a captcha in the way
11:55 < _mukti_> I'm not seeing a captcha, but then, I'm logged in.
11:55 < durka42> yes
11:55 < durka42> captcha iff not logged in
11:56 < _mukti_> Ok, saving as web archive (though for me, page source was offered first) and then reopening I get a rendering error. Maybe this is what Gleki is talking about?
11:57 < durka42> I think so
11:57 < durka42> when I look at the .webarchive in a text editor, I see a bunch of dt and dd
11:57 < _mukti_> Yeah, webarchive looks kind of like a tarfile. Let me see if tar can expand it.
11:58 < _mukti_> No, not a tarfile
11:58 < _mukti_> Aha?
11:59 < _mukti_>  file en.webarchive
11:59 < _mukti_> en.webarchive: Apple binary property lis
11:59 < _mukti_> (list)
12:00 < durka42> of course
12:00 < durka42> well known format
12:00 < durka42> zo'o
12:00 < la_kristan> all the examples in that chapter are legible.
12:00 < durka42> yay!
12:00 < _mukti_> plutil -convert xml1 en.webarchive
12:00 < _mukti_> (makes it at least readable)
12:01 < la_kristan> but I don't remember if those were legible in the one I have or not...
12:01 < _mukti_> Well, kind of. Opening the result, all of the data seems to be stuffed in a "WebResourceData" element, base-64 encoded
12:02 < durka42> yeah, "readable" but not really heh
12:02 < durka42> you need to save it as "page source" if you're going to import it to anything that expects our XML format
12:03 < la_kristan> mostly it was ones with long-winded Lojban sentences, the words would overlap each other.
12:03 < _mukti_> So are we looking for a way to hint to Safari that it should not offer "web archive" as an option?
12:04 < durka42> it should just download the file, as if it were a ZIP or whatever
12:04 < durka42> I dunno if you can tell it to do that
12:04 < _mukti_> Yeah, I'm skeptical. ia nai
12:05 < gleki> _mukti_: i dont have safari but note the version of it mentioned
12:06 < la_kristan> also, in the chapter on vocatives, the list was messed up in such a way that most of it was pushed off the page and I couldn't read it, which was rather disappointing
12:06 < durka42> I wonder what MIME type we serve it as
12:06 < durka42> vlaste: coi (cll)
12:06 < vlaste> coi (cll) = http://dag.github.io/cll/6/11/  http://dag.github.io/cll/13/14/
12:06 < gleki> la_kristan: in what book?
12:06 < gleki> la_kristan: in CLL?
12:06 < la_kristan> yeah, the cll
12:06 < durka42> do you know which of those chapters?
12:07 < gleki> la_kristan: link to what you were looking at? a pdf version?
12:07 < _mukti_> durka42: application/xml
12:07 < durka42> _mukti_: http://stackoverflow.com/a/4832418/1114328
12:07 < durka42> no idea if that would make a difference
12:08 < _mukti_> Maybe the best solution would be offer an explicit link for those who wish to download the file rather than view it. The XSLT was added to make the XML viewable as a result of a different feature request.
12:08 < gleki> _mukti_: our hypothesis was that that old safari tried to render xml and to save not the source but the result of rendering
12:08 < durka42> I think that hypothesis is correct
12:08 < gleki> _mukti_: the quick fix is to detect an old version of safari and to download xml, not render it
12:08 < _mukti_> Let me see if I can extract the goodies out of the webarchive so I can at least determine what Safari is saving.
12:08 < la_kristan> gleki; it was a pdf; I don't have the link at the moment.
12:08 < _mukti_> gleki: We're not rendering anything... the browser does that
12:09 < _mukti_> But if you mean disabling XSLT if Safari is detected, we could do that.
12:09 < la_kristan> and I haven't seen if it's the same way when it's not on my phone.
12:09 < _mukti_> Alternately, we could provide an explicit download link.
12:10 < _mukti_> durka42: Interesting
12:10 < _mukti_> (text/xml)
12:11 < _mukti_> I'm not sure though if we'd consider it humanly readable without the XSLT transforms -- given that they were added because of complaints that the bare XML was not readable.
12:12 < gleki> _mukti_: i think that for safari the only link should be "download"
12:12 < gleki> for an old safari
12:12 < gleki> la_kristan: maybe this http://vrici.lojban.org/~rlpowell/media/public/cll_build-2015-06-20/cll_prince.pdf
12:13 < durka42> what's old? is safari 8 old? I have safari 7, .u'i
12:13 < _mukti_> Well, I have a newish (if not the newest) safari, and I'm seeing an issue with webarchive, so it seems to affect Safari in general -- not just the old one
12:13 < _mukti_> I'm using 8.0.6
12:13 < la_kristan> gleki: it's got a red cover, that's all I know.
12:15 < gleki> _mukti_: im sure for safari you can replace the direct link to .xml file to a link downloading that .xml file.
12:15 < gleki> _mukti_: im surprised you want to fix that issue.
12:16 < gleki> _mukti_: this bug is much more serious: i cant add glosswords anymore https://github.com/lojban/jbovlaste/issues/165
12:16 < _mukti_> gleki: Whenever something new arrives that seems easy, I try to close it quickly. But I agree there are more worthwhile things to do.
12:17 < gleki> you can just link everybody to mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/ircbot/dumps/
12:45 < gfsh> hello, would the lojban community be interested in Mozilla localization for lojban?
12:45 < gfsh> just throwing some feelers out there, I am not authorized to offer anything :)
12:46 < gfsh> say, something like mozilla.com, websites or even the browser (though the latter is much more complex an operation)
12:49 < durka42> more localizations are always awesome :)
12:49 < gfsh> there would have to be say... at least 1K active users and 4-5 people willing to keep the locale updated
12:50 < durka42> that first one is quite a tall order
12:50 < gfsh> I was also looking for klingon speakers, but they don't hang out on freenode :(
12:50 < durka42> heh
12:50 < _mukti_> Yes, sadly we're an order of magnitude at least away from that.
12:51 < _mukti_> The locale updating, we could probably handle.
12:51 < gfsh> in any event, if people are willing to do the work the Mozilla community will likely say 'yes'
12:51 < _mukti_> That's good to know. Where do we start?
12:53 < gfsh> _mukti_: I would begin with something maintainable by a few people, like mozilla.com
12:53 < gfsh> it's a few thousand strings to keep updated and they don't change very much over a few months
12:53 < _mukti_> I see the Mozilla wiki is MediaWiki. We've got quite a bit of localization in our installation.
12:54 < gfsh> Support Mozilla? (sumo)
12:54 < gfsh> ah, the wikipedia is something separate
12:55 < gfsh> no, sumo is too large for a small team to do, especially if there's no demand for it :)
12:55 < _mukti_> I was looking at this: https://wiki.mozilla.org/L10n:Localization_Process
12:56 < gfsh> _mukti_: https://svn.mozilla.org/projects/mozilla.com/trunk/locales/
12:57 < gfsh> this is where localization files for mozilla.com websites are stored ^^
12:57 < gfsh> _mukti_: if you can use subversion, the command "svn checkout https://svn.mozilla.org/projects/mozilla.com/trunk/locales/" is what you can use
12:57 < gfsh> that will grab the files from all locales
12:57 < gfsh> the en-US locale is the default one which everyone uses as a template
12:58 < _mukti_> gfsh: Thanks, I'll check it out.
12:58 < _mukti_> (Literally.)
12:58 < gfsh> now, the .lang file format is relatively simple
12:58 < gfsh> the source string is the lines that begin with ;
12:58 < gfsh> and the target string (localized string) is the line immediately after
12:58 < la_kristan> #klingon has existed since 2009
12:59 < la_kristan> but last I checked nobody was there.
12:59 < gfsh> keep the file format as UTF-8 without BOM, keep all html/xml or identifiers
13:00 < gfsh> if you wanna give it a shot, you can edit some of those files and I can give you instructions on how to set up your own private server for testing the website
13:00 < _mukti_> It sounds like you know your way around the project.
13:00 < gfsh> I am a new localizer myself too, only been doing it for about 2 months :)
13:01 < _mukti_> What's your target language(s), if you don't mind me asking?
13:01  * durka42 svn co
13:01 < gfsh> Romanian
13:01 < _mukti_> I assume Esperanto is already well represented?
13:02 < durka42> how big is this repository o_O
13:02 < gfsh> a few megabytes
13:02 < durka42> oh so it i
13:02 < durka42> s
13:02 < durka42> just a lot of small files
13:03 < gfsh> the end of line format is linux: LF
13:03 < durka42> by file size, the esperanto localization is about 50%
13:03 < durka42> dunno if that means anything
13:06 < gfsh> actually, the esperanto localization is complete for mozilla.com, just checked :)
13:06 < gfsh> just missing 4 strings
13:07 < gfsh> https://l10n.mozilla-community.org/webdashboard/?locale=eo
13:07 < gfsh> the section named "State of your lang files"
13:07 < gfsh> External Web Projects are other mozilla-related websites
13:10  * durka42 wonders what the ISO code is for klingon
13:10 < gfsh> tlh
13:11 < durka42> makes sense
13:12 < gfsh> the website in esperanto https://www.mozilla.org/eo/
13:20 < la_kristan> I'm a FireFox user, but I can't take on another project just at present.
13:23  * la_kristan finishes slicing a seemingly endless pile of strawberries.
13:23 < gleki> gfsh: there is a group localizing Firefox to Lojban but it's not active. cirko wanted to localize Firefox
13:23 < gleki> but i havent heard any news from him about that
13:24 < gleki> translatewiki.net is for localizing MediaWiki
13:24 < gfsh> gleki: it's a somwewhat complex project that takes a full team to do
13:24 < gfsh> the browser itself
13:24 < gleki> ofc. i do translations on it once in a while since the main lojban wiki is also mediawiki
13:24 < gleki> gfsh: i also fully localized Vivaldi browser to lojban
13:24 < gleki> and tatoeba.org
13:25 < gleki> but the latter is probably not relevant
13:25 < gfsh> ah, opera
13:25 < gleki> opera doesnt accept any localizations
13:25 < gleki> they hire a company who does everything for them
13:25 < gfsh> still, vivaldi is proprietary technology
13:25 < gleki> they dont accept any volunteers
13:26 < gleki> Vivaldi was nice in that it allowed to see what we can get in the end
13:26 < gfsh> I suppose it makes sense for a proprietary company
13:26 < gleki> Chromium also has Lojban localization, even more strings than for Esperanto are translated but still not enough even for compiling a Lojban Chromium
13:27 < gfsh> Chromium is a pain in the ass to compile on your own
13:27 < gleki> i mean to translate surface GUI
13:27 < gleki> i have no clue what are the most important  strings there
13:27 < gleki> it's on luanchpad.net
13:27 < gleki> launchpad.net
13:28 < gleki> Also I wish someone got developer acccess on gerrit to manually add some localizations files for Mediawiki
13:28 < gfsh> gleki: hm... if I were to do it, I would manually explore the interface, write down the strings in some file with descriptions, then grep -riI the localization file for the source strings
13:28 < gfsh> recursive grep in the source code
13:28 < gleki> e.g. "Special:" prefix isn't on translatewiki.net. it's somewhere in /languages/ subfolder of mediawiki
13:29 < gfsh> that way at least you get to see where things are stored
13:29 < gleki> gfsh: i just thought to be sincere to myself and translate everything! but i have too many tasks in Lojbanistan
13:29 < gfsh> gleki: of course, a web browser is a huge project even for just localization
13:30 < gleki> launchpad.net unlike Transifex doesnt provide good hints on what each term for Chromium may mean, what its context
13:30 < gleki> i just dont understand what some strings mean, where they are used
13:30 < gleki> not even in English
13:31 < gleki> i have nowhere to ask
13:31 < gleki> unlike with Vivaldi and Tatoeba
13:31 < gleki> and MediaWiki
13:31 < gfsh> ah, it's why I would go about it in reverse, from the interface and then locate the strings in the localization source files
13:32 < gfsh> that way at least you can do the interface even if some stuff like error messages remain untranslated
13:34 < gleki> if i knew how to compile Chromium strings to a file and immediately test what i get ...
13:34 < gleki> e.g. for Tatoeba you have dev.tatoeba.org website. Whatever you translate on Transifex in half an hour goes to that website so that you can test what you did.
13:35 < gleki> It goes to production only once a week
13:35 < gfsh> that's cool
13:35 < gleki> so you have a lot of time to polish everything
13:35 < gleki> Vivaldi does this de facto once a fortnight id say
13:35 < gleki> still fine
13:35 < gfsh> I would be apprehensive at contributing to a proprietary project, however
13:35 < gleki> with Chromium and Firefox i just have no motivation
13:36 < gleki> Vivaldi has only 400 strings, that's easy
13:36 < gfsh> not bad :)
13:36 < gfsh> firefox has oh, tens of thousands
13:36 < gleki> at least we now know how to translate GUI widgets names etc.
13:36 < ctefaho> Firefox has tens of thousands of strings for one language?
13:37 < gleki> Vivaldi localisation file can be downloaded and analyzed as a dictionary
13:37 < gfsh> well, a few thousands are the key ones, the rest are features buried deep like the debugger
13:37 < gleki> debugger should be probably only in English
13:37 < gleki> anyway we first need to ask cirko
13:37 < gfsh> well, French insist on doing every little string
13:37 < gleki> cirko! where are you??
13:37 < gleki> do zvati ma doi la cirko
13:37 < gleki> i ma nuzba la faglo'u
13:38 < la_kristan> my phone's battery is low...
13:38 < gleki> cliva: akmnlrse: ma nuzba la faglo'u i xu do fanva
13:38 < la_kristan> and I'm too busy to stand by the charger.
13:39 < gleki> gfsh: if you have anything particular in mind you can start translating, sure. if you can make your lifer easier by providing translation or testing interface for s then ... we'll gladly accept it and help you
13:39 < gleki> *for us
13:40 < la_kristan> so I guess I have to go: I just got the low-battery warning from the phone...
13:40 < gleki> co'o la kristan
13:41 < la_kristan> co'o
13:41 < gleki> i am afk  now too.
13:53 < astroendjisai> That's a long pingtime
13:58 < Ilmen> Well the grammar changes since the CLL are few, the two major official changes are Xorlo and Dotsides; Xorlo doesn't change Lojban's syntax, but only the exact meaning of a few Lojban words; Dotsides is a very minor grammar change only affecting lojbanized foreign personal names
14:00 < Ilmen> The CLL (Complete Lojban Language, the reference grammar) book is currently in the slow process of being updated
14:00 < Ilmen> but as it's a volunteering undertaking, it's slow
14:00 < Ilmen> (The CLL is a big book!)
14:02 < Ilmen> You can still very well learn Lojban using the current CLL release (which doesn't contain yet the Xorlo and Dotside reforms), because Lojban hasn't changed much since the one described in the CLL
14:04 < Ilmen> However the CLL isn't intended as a tutorial or learning guide, it's a reference grammar; starting with one of the various Lojban courses available is probably better; the Wave Lessons and the Crash Course are famous ones
14:04 < Ilmen> mu'o su'o no jundi be di'u
14:05 < ctefaho> coi Ilmen
14:07 < Ilmen> coi do
14:07 < ctefaho> do mo ma
14:11 < Ilmen> mi zo'u zilcte gi'e vacri glare
14:16 < Ilmen> .i cu'uxna fami ca'o feda foloka bazukte fami fece
14:52 < Ilmen> exp: ze'a lo nu ro tarmi lo se pensi be lo remna cu nitcu fa ma'a lo ka sanga lo jai se jalge be lo nu ri pensi
14:52 < mensi> ([ze'a {lo <nu (¹[{<ro BOI> tarmi KU} {lo <(²se pensi²) (²be [lo remna KU] BEhO²)> KU}] [cu {nitcu <fa ma'a> <lo (²ka [CU {sanga <lo (³[jai {se jalge}] [be {lo <nu (⁴ri [CU {pensi VAU}]⁴) KE
14:52 < mensi> I> KU} BEhO]³) KU> VAU}] KEI²) KU>} VAU]¹) KEI> KU}] VAU)
14:53 < Ilmen> ŭa nai
14:55 < Ilmen> .a'o tincpa fliba
17:48 < zipcpi> vlaste: vujnu (gimka)
17:48 < vlaste> zo vujnu gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo vujnu gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
17:56 < phma> vlaste: gimka
17:56 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/gimka
17:56 < phma> vlaste: ginka (gimka)
17:56 < vlaste> zo ginka gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo ginka gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
17:57 < phma> vlaste: gimka (ginka)
17:57 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/gimka
17:57 < phma> vlaste: ginka
17:57 < vlaste> ginka = x1 is a camp/encampment/temporary residence of x2 at location x3.
17:57 < zipcpi> lol the gimka thing is just a shortening, but too bad it's a clashing gismu
17:57 < zipcpi> I had suggested {gimpro}
17:59 < phma> I've been translating the middle third of Ki Tetze, which will be the parashat ha shavua shel jbonunsla, and which talks about camping for war, so the word is on my mind.
17:59 < zipcpi> Cool
17:59 < zipcpi> I wanted {vujnu} as the gismu for subtraction, so that it's more semantically separated from {selsumji}, which might be "addend"
18:03 < zipcpi> Gotta go. co'o
19:55 < klaku> coi lojbo prenu .i do mo
20:07 < klaku> za'a na'e jundi vau ui
21:23 < astroendjisai> Hello. I have a question. Can 'n' ever sound like 'ng' like in 'sing' (such as before G or K) or is it always 'n'
21:23 < durka42> yeah, you can pronounce it that way
21:23 < durka42> it's an allophone
21:24 < astroendjisai> Sorry my browser glitched
21:24 < durka42> but if there's a 'g' or 'k' after the 'n', you have to pronounce that too :)
21:24 < durka42> oh whoops
21:24 < durka42> yes you can pronounce it that way
21:24 < durka42> it's an allophone
21:24 < astroendjisai> Okay cool.
21:24 < astroendjisai> Thanks
22:01 < zipcpi> Why does {pilji} get a rafsi but not anything else? I suppose they ran out T.T
22:03 < zipcpi> Hmm... I'm begining to see the utility of xe'e being in PA
22:03 < zipcpi> xe'e le drata
22:03 < zipcpi> le xe'e drata doesn't quite work the same way
23:01 < zipcpi> Hm well if {xe'e} is the anti-{mo'oi} then maybe it should be in LE... but that would break using bare {xe'e} as an answer to a {mo'oi} question
23:02 < gleki> i need to also explain UD operators like {dei} somewhere
23:02 < zipcpi> Hm
23:03 < gleki> because {lo mlatu pe dei cu pinxe} - The UD cat drinks
23:03 < gleki> and {do'e nai dei mlatu cu pinxe} - Cats in general drink
23:03 < gleki> and {do'e nai dei lo mlatu cu pinxe} - Cats in general drink
23:04 < zipcpi> Interesting
23:04 < gleki> altough va'o and na'o is what is usually meant so all my previous comments on that Talk page still stand
23:05 < zipcpi> The thing is even {na'o}... it could mean {na'oku la .mitynz. cu pinxe}, or {na'oku lo su'a mlatu cu pinxe}
23:06 < zipcpi> So I'm not sure {na'o} actually solves the problem; merely throws more things to King Context
23:06 < gleki> of course it adds more things otherwise how could you get the distinction
23:07 < gleki> also note that {na'o} explicitly adds things to context, not denies them from context
23:07 < zipcpi> Yes, but there is still the problem of whether {lo mlatu} refers to a specific cat like one that might be named Mittens, or a generalization of all cats
23:08 < gleki> lo mlatu pe dei as i said
23:09 < zipcpi> Well if that's what it takes to formalize {le}, *shrugs*
23:09 < gleki> no the same as {i da poi mlatu zo'u do broda ije da brodi}
23:09 < gleki> not the same as {i da poi mlatu zo'u do broda ije da brodi}
23:09 < gleki> so not about {le}, no
23:09 < gleki> nor about {da}
23:10 < gleki> i just dont know what are your problems and you are saying that you know them intuitively. so i just added one more answer to a question that im trying to guess
23:12 < zipcpi> And I don't know what is it that you are having trouble understanding...
23:12 < gleki> why do you need {le} and what it is
23:12 < gleki> and what is "apples" in general
23:13 < zipcpi> It's the difference between the specific cat that might be named Mittens, and just a generalization of all cats without referring to any one cat
23:14 < zipcpi> You told me that Russian uses demonstratives instead of articles to refer to deictic/specific cats, but in Lojban we don't use ti/ta/tu that way
23:15 < zipcpi> Thus I think the "malgli" solution is the best solution right now
23:15 < gleki> both {da} and {dei} solutions can work here. they mean different things, though.
23:15 < gleki> i solved all your questions and added one more with {dei}. so im struggling to understand why you still need this {xe'e}
23:16 < zipcpi> Oh it's xe'e now? That is for "Choose any two apples"
23:16 < zipcpi> {ro} doesn't work here
23:17 < zipcpi> Like I said, it's the anti-mo'oi, "which"
23:18 < zipcpi> It makes no sense to ask "which two apples" after I told you choose "any two apples"
23:19 < zipcpi> {lo} here doesn't disambiguate, because I can still ask "which"
23:20 < gleki> the two apples here can be either expressed using {da} if you preserve your variable across UD or with {dei} which is just about UD
23:21 < zipcpi> ko cuxna re da poi me lo plise ?
23:22 < gleki> {re plise}
23:22 < gleki> {re da poi plise}
23:22 < zipcpi> What about the reverse case then... "Which apple do you want"?
23:22 < gleki> but for that {da} should be declared somewhere
23:22 < gleki> zipcpi, we already discussed that
23:22 < gleki> if you need logs
23:23 < zipcpi> Hm... lo se cuxna be do...
23:23 < zipcpi> Not sure if that breaks down somewhere; will have to think about it
23:24 < zipcpi> "Which of the members should complete the project"
23:25 < gleki> i have all the logs. by request i email them
23:25 < zipcpi> I do too
23:25 < zipcpi> At least, logs of when I'm present
23:27 < zipcpi> But yeah... ""Which of the members should complete the project?"... that might be where {lo se cuxna be do} doesn't quite work
23:28 < zipcpi> mo'oi cmima be le fuzykamni cu ei mulgau le gungunma
23:31 < zipcpi> Perhaps the "correct" answer is {da}, but that might not be understood
23:36 < zipcpi> Maybe I'll wait to ask a few others about {da}. Anyway I gotta nap. See ya
--- Day changed Sun Jul 05 2015
01:03 < fghjebj> ithkuil: amnadya
01:03 < ithkuil> amnadya: P1S1/STA-mn-OBL-UNI/CSL/A/PRX/RPV-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
01:07 < fghjebj> ithkuil: sorpeka
01:07 < ithkuil> sorpeka: P1S1/STA-s-ERG-AGG/VAR/U/DEL/NRM-SSD_1/3-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
01:09 < fghjebj> ithkuil: arxokuna
01:09 < ithkuil> arxokuna: P1S1/STA-rx-ERG-UNI/ASO/U/DEL/NRM-AGC_1/9-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
01:11 < gleki> ma smuni zo'oi rx
01:12 < gleki> -RX-  ‘OBLIQUELY LINEAR  MOTION (relative to XYZ grid) The stems of this root are patterned after the root -K-
01:12 < gleki> wth
01:12 < gleki> i mi muvdu ma
01:12 < gleki> i ju'ocu'i mi muvdu to'o la itku'ile
01:30 < gleki> ithkuil: gleki
01:30 < ithkuil> gleki: P1S1/STA-gl-ABS-UNI/ASO/U/DEL/NRM-FNC-IFL/UNFRAMED
01:31 < gleki> ithkuil: lo mlatu cu pinxe lo ladru
01:31 < ithkuil> lo: Personal adjunct
01:31 < ithkuil> mlatu: P1S1/STA-ml-OBL-UNI/CSL/U/DEL/NRM-AMG-IFL/UNFRAMED
01:31 < ithkuil> cu: Personal adjunct
01:31 < ithkuil> pinxe: P1S1/STA-p-AFF-nx-RPS-IFL/UNFRAMED
01:31 < ithkuil> lo: Personal adjunct
01:31 < ithkuil> ladru: P1S1/STA-l-OBL-UNI/CSL/U/TRM/RPV-AMG-IFL/UNFRAMED
01:39 < gleki> alta: lo mlatu goi pinxe
01:39 < mensi> ([FA {lo <(¹mlatu NF¹) (¹goi [FIhA {ZOhE KU}] GEhU¹)> KU}] [CU {pinxe NF} VAU])
01:39 < gleki> now tag can't be {TAG ku} but only {TAG sumti ku}
01:39 < gleki> hence ZOhE is inserted
03:51 < ctefaho> coi
03:54 < gleki> coi
04:22 < ctefaho> gleki, when you added "smaka" what did you base it on?
04:36 < Amnadya2> .
04:40 < Amnadya2> It seems lojban is way better at scope than ithkuil
04:43 < ctefaho> Does Ithkuil not have well-defined scope then?
04:45 < zipcpi> Hm... perhaps the problem with {ko cuxna re plise} actually lies in {ko}
04:45 < zipcpi> Compare
04:45 < zipcpi> re da poi plise zo'u: mi djica lo nu do cuxna da
04:46 < zipcpi> vs
04:46 < zipcpi> mi djica lo nu, re da poi plise zo'u: do cuxna da
04:47 < zipcpi> First: There are two apples such that I want you to choose them; which means I want you to choose those two apples, and nothing else
04:47 < zipcpi> Second, I want there to be two apples such that you choose them; which means I just want you to choose two apples
04:49 < zipcpi> Compare perhaps, {mi viska re prenu}; "I see two people"; even here, {mo'oi re prenu} "Which two people" might still apply, asking for more information
04:50 < zipcpi> On the other hand I don't think that {mi viska xe'ere prenu} would be meaningful
04:52 < zipcpi> Perhaps that's the similar issue with {lo}/{le}... whether the prenex starts after {mi xusra lo du'u}, or before
04:52 < gleki> ctefaho: in meaning or in etymology?
04:52 < zipcpi> (Issues with {da} vs {zo'e} and {mi nitcu lo mikce} aside)
04:53 < gleki> i ta'o ba'a sy ba tinke la itku'ile
04:53 < demize> gleki: etymology. ;)
04:53 < gleki> demize: on English, Scandinavian, Russian
04:53 < demize> Mmm.. Figures.
04:54 < demize> {smaka} is 'smaka' in Swedish.
04:54 < demize> Which was why he asked.
04:54 < gleki> smack
04:54 < gleki> [smak] in Russian
04:54 < gleki> i just open wiktionary and search there
04:54 < gleki> for lojban-looking words
04:55 < gleki> vlaste: bacru (gimka)
04:55 < vlaste> zo bacru gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo bacru gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
04:55 < gleki> vlaste: datru (gimka)
04:55 < vlaste> zo datru gimkamsmikezypro zo tatru noi catni gismu .i zo datru gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
04:55 < gleki> vlaste: smaka (gimka)
04:55 < vlaste> zo smaka gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo smaka gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
04:56 < gleki> vlaste: gosta (gimka)
04:56 < vlaste> zo gosta gimkamsmikezypro zo kosta noi catni gismu .i zo gosta gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
04:56 < gleki> vlaste: tasta (gimka)
04:56 < vlaste> zo tasta gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo tasta gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
04:56 < gleki> mi pu djica tu'a zo'oi gosta i ku'i za'adai
04:56 < ctefaho> je'e
04:58 < zipcpi> What did you want {gosta} to mean?
04:59 < ctefaho> me gusta
04:59 < gleki> probably what tasta means now
05:00 < zipcpi> Ah
05:05 < _mukti_> ue
05:06 < _mukti_> en: seldri
05:08 < gleki> heh https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Lojban_phrases
05:09 < _mukti_> valste: seldri
05:09 < _mukti_> vlaste: seldri
05:09 < vlaste> seldri = x2=b1 is sad/depressed/dejected/[unhappy/feels sorrow/grief] about x1=b2 (abstraction).
05:09 < _mukti_> How can {seldri} have the same place structure as {badri} ?!
05:11 < gleki> it doesnt
05:12 < gleki> as for mensi its again vrici's problems
05:13 < _mukti_> Is it a particular bad definition? I see that {selte'a} is accurate.
05:15 < gleki> just read it carefully
05:15 < gleki> en: coi
05:15 < mensi> coi = [COI] vocative: greetings/hello. |>>> officialdata
05:15 < _mukti_> Oh, I see. It's giving x2 first.
05:16 < gleki> no idea what's the use of such definitions
05:16 < gleki> some understanding that newer generations of lojbanists lost.
05:16 < _mukti_> Yes, given that they confuse someone like myself who has had some exposure.
05:17 < gleki> neither i have that understanding
05:26 < zipcpi> Yeah I think if the SE-rafsi lujvo are to be useful, they must be tied to a gloss word somehow and reworded, rather than just changing the numbering
05:27 < zipcpi> It's like how {terve'u} might be used to convey the meaning of "buy", vs "was sold to"
05:29 < gleki> or maybe they should be ignored and never used
05:29 < zipcpi> Perhaps the problem with CLL-{le} was that it focused too much on the non-veridicality aspect, when (I think) that fact is incidental rather than definitional. The point is to describe an object to make a reference to it
05:29 < gleki> zei: mi terve'u ti
05:29 < mensi> mi te vecnu ti
05:30 < zipcpi> zei: mi selzauka'e ti
05:30 < mensi> mi se zei zanru zei kakne ti
05:31 < zipcpi> Hmm...
05:31 < _mukti_> I see the non-veridical aspect of CLL {le} as being strongly related to the notion of reference: The reference is primary, and the description is explicitly weakened in favor of it.
05:31 < zipcpi> Yeah
05:32 < gleki> Loglan and partially CLL shows the desire to embed some logician's theories into the language.
05:33 < gleki> Loglan would have turned into another Laadan or Esperanto until Jeff Prothero did his work putting the end to this disease.
05:35 < gleki> there shouldnt be any philosophies embedded into the language except the instrument of operating the text itself.
05:36 < zipcpi> gleki: Well I have observed there to be a trend for some distaste for using affixed opposites... {tolpo'u} eventually became {akti}, {tolci'o} eventually became {laldo}, {tolcri} seems to have stuck though
05:36 < gleki> jbo: akti
05:37 < mensi> akti = x1 ca'a zilpilno x2 |>>> ko catlu fe ji'a zo pilno |>>> gleki
05:37 < gleki> jbo: tolpo'u
05:37 < mensi> tolpo'u [< to'e spofu ≈ To'e spofu*] = x1 to'e spofu x2 |>>> srana fa zo spofu |>>>
05:37 < mensi> Ilmen
05:37 < gleki> jbo: spofu
05:37 < mensi> spofu = x1 na ka'e akti x2 |>>> gleki
05:37 < gleki> yes
05:37 < zipcpi> lol
05:37 < gleki> so tolpo'u != akti
05:38 < zipcpi> Erm, I think the meaning is the same, we've just refactored the definitions, changing the primitives
05:39 < gleki> the key difference is in ka'e/ca'a
05:39 < _mukti_> Well, there's a well-established tradition for the relation of reference to description.
05:40 < zipcpi> gleki: So a computer that's turned off isn't {akti}?
05:40 < _mukti_> On the one hand, there's the idea of descriptions which "rigidly designate" to the extent that they are functionally equivalent with reference.
05:40 < zipcpi> I have no idea what {zilpilno} is
05:40 < _mukti_> And on the other hand, descriptions which are shorthand for a reference which is primarily subjective.
05:41 < _mukti_> CLL {le} seems to be a nod in the direction of the latter tradition.
05:41 < gleki> akti implies ca'a
05:41 < zipcpi> zilpilno isn't even defined
05:41 < gleki> tolpo'u doesnt
05:42 < gleki> zilpilno = zi'o pilno
05:42 < gleki> that's another jvajvo rule
05:42 < _mukti_> The canonical example of {le nanmu cu ninmo} is an example of that.
05:42 < zipcpi> Yeah
05:42 < gleki> i wish la samyuan si das could create a wiki page with all jvajvo rules
05:43 < zipcpi> Is a computer that is turned off {akti}?
05:43 < gleki> ofc. only reference in the meaning of parsing text is the only justifiable concept.
05:43 < gleki> zipcpi: no since it's not ca'a se pilno gi'a ca'a zilpilno
05:44 < zipcpi> Oh OK
05:45 < zipcpi> Hm where does {cando} fit into this...
05:45 < gleki> nowhere
05:45 < zipcpi> How do you say "turn off/turn on" then?
05:46 < gleki> gasnu lo nu co'u ca'a zilpilno
05:47 < zipcpi> Hm... longish...
05:47 < gleki> gau ko'a na akti then 
05:47 < gleki> we should teach people ergative case style more
05:47 < gleki> ko'a jai gau akti be na fai ...
05:48 < gleki> even if fix grammar then
05:48 < gleki> ko'a jai gau na akti fai ...
05:48 < gleki> still long
05:48 < gleki> gau ko'a na akti <-- but this isnt translated into English word by word
05:49 < zipcpi> The thing is that the "ergative case style" isn't just problematic by being difficult for English speakers; it also breaks {gi'e} / {jecu}
05:49 < gleki> then dont use gi'e
05:50 < gleki> although i dont see how it breaks
05:50 < gleki> mi klama ije gau mi lo canko cu kalri?
05:50 < zipcpi> Then what? {.i lo jai gau go'i}?
05:50 < zipcpi> The sumti might be much more complicated than {mi}
05:50 < gleki> {mi} is already a sumti
05:51 < gleki> alta: mi
05:51 < zipcpi> Even something like {da}, you want to keep the reference somehow
05:51 < gleki> vrici!
05:51 < gleki> iunai
05:51 < mensi> ([FA mi] [CU {COhE VAU}])
05:51 < gleki> _mukti_: what's going on with vrici atm? especially with network
05:51 < _mukti_> gleki: Not sure. What are you experiencing?
05:52 < gleki> im experiencing livla.js not responding  fast
05:52 < gleki> alta: mi jai gau akti
05:52 < mensi> ([FA mi] [CU {jai gau <akti NF>} VAU])
05:52 < _mukti_> I'll check vrici
05:52 < gleki> alta: mi na akti
05:52 < mensi> ([FA mi] [CU {na <akti NF>} VAU])
05:52 < gleki> shall i fix this:
05:52 < gleki> alta: mi jai gau na akti
05:52 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "a" found.
05:53 < gleki> hm, now responds fast
05:53 < gleki> some backups were running again probably
05:53 < _mukti_> I annotated "prami simbi'o": http://genius.com/Djemynai-prami-simbio-lyrics/
05:54 < gleki> en: simbi'o
05:55 < gleki> wth
05:55 < gleki> again slow!
05:55 < gleki> _mukti_: see? it's not replying fast
05:55 < mensi> simbi'o [< simxu binxo ≈ Mutual become] = s1=b1 (mass/set) integrate / unite with each other, displaying quality s2.
05:55 < mensi> |>>> Cf. simxu, jmaji, jorne. |>>> tijlan
05:57 < zipcpi> It breaks because gi'e/jecu depends on copying all the sumti before the main selbri, including all sumtcita, not so useful if one statement is "ergative" but the other isn't. The alternative is using {.i le jai gau go'i}, oftentimes
05:57 < gleki> let's try the fix
05:59 < gleki> alta: mi jai gau na akti
05:59 < mensi> ([FA mi] [CU {jai gau na <akti NF>} VAU])
06:00 < zipcpi> alta mi broda jai akti
06:00 < zipcpi> alta: mi broda jai akti
06:00 < mensi> ([FA mi] [CU {broda <jai (¹akti NF¹)>} VAU])
06:01 < gleki> i just allowed {jai tag? (tag / NA_clause)* broda}
06:01 < gleki> wait
06:01 < gleki> what could {jai na akti} mean?
06:01 < _mukti_> Hmm... seeing slowness logging into vrici
06:01 < gleki> _mukti_: oh nice! very nice!
06:01 < zipcpi> gleki: Dunno, but {jai na fenki}?
06:01 < zipcpi> Though that could just be {na jai fenki}
06:02 < gleki> how is {na} expanded?
06:02 < gleki> jbo: na
06:02 < mensi> na = [NA] tcita lu'e lo bridi le du'u sinxa le natfe be la'e ri |>>> bridi natfe; ja'a |>>>
06:02 < mensi> xorxes
06:02 < zipcpi> Not sure... jitfa? natfe?
06:03 < gleki> ko'a natfe lo du'u broda?
06:03 < zipcpi> I don't know how you can simulate right expanding scope of NA and sumtcita though
06:03 < zipcpi> That is just a little beyond me at this point
06:03 < gleki> arent NA clauses have the same scope as all tags except FA?
06:04 < zipcpi> They didn't use to be, they used to have topmost scope when I was first taught, dunno if that has changed lately as according to that wiki article; I think it makes sense
06:05 < gleki> im tired of fighting over that
06:05 < gleki> and the scope isnt displayed by any parsers anyway
06:05 < zipcpi> Yeah that is a problem...
06:05 < gleki> today i also banned {bai ku} in altatufa
06:05 < gleki> but ... it still works
06:05 < gleki> oh hm, maybe not
06:06 < zipcpi> Why would you want to ban that? It's just {bai zo'e}
06:06 < _mukti_> There's a busy tarsnap process running as root on vrici. Probably a cronjob.
06:06 < gleki> alta: bai gau broda
06:06 < mensi> ([FA ZOhE] [CU {<bai gau> <broda NF>} VAU])
06:07 < gleki> alta: bai cu broda
06:07 < _mukti_> Yeah, it's a backup.
06:07 < mensi> ([{bai ZOhE} {FA ZOhE}] [cu {broda NF} VAU])
06:07 < gleki> _mukti_: why cant we/robin make these backups e.g.  slower but consuming so many resources?
06:07 < _mukti_> I expect that after it's done running vrici will become more responsive.
06:08 < gleki> but it happens every day
06:08 < _mukti_> gleki: I'm sure it should be possible to either reschedule the backups and/or make them "nicer"
06:11 < gleki> _mukti_: since it happens every day it'd be of high priority for me since eveyone uses mensi nad naxle
06:11 < gleki> *and
06:14 < gleki> en:coi
06:14 < mensi> coi = [COI] vocative: greetings/hello.
06:15 < gleki> alta: bai fa mi mo
06:15 < mensi> ([{bai ZOhE} {fa mi}] [CU {mo VAU}])
06:15 < gleki> alta: bai ku fa mi mo
06:15 < mensi> ([{bai ku} {fa mi}] [CU {mo VAU}])
06:19 < gleki> so i removed KU_elidible everywhere except for the end of sumti
06:33  * nuzba @Saffy: Currently @MariiKusha is obsessed with languages and apparently I taught her some sign - @alaric is getting questions about #lojban [http://bit.ly/1JGYr2Z]
06:34 < zipcpi> mukti: Should I attempt a translation? A semantic one though; not a poetic one or one meant to be sung
06:38 < zipcpi> Does this website even allow translations...
06:55 < gleki> how to translate "hover" in computer sense?
06:55 < gleki> (computing) To place the cursor over a hyperlink or icon without clicking.
06:56 < zipcpi> I thought of klikenu'o but I'm not sure I added that
06:56 < gleki> they should be in a table in the wiki
06:57 < zipcpi> Yeah apparently I didn't add that
06:58 < gleki> there should be a list of all such functions
06:59 < zipcpi> Yeah
06:59 < gleki> hm, maybe this? https://api.jquery.com/category/events/mouse-events/
07:01 < zipcpi> "toggle"; hm that might go with "turn on" and "turn off"
07:02 < zipcpi> Does {akti} means turned on *and* tolpo'u though, or just turned on?
07:02 < gleki> in Vivaldi i used {vraga} for toggle
07:04 < gleki> en: e'a
07:04 < mensi> e'a = [UI1] attitudinal: granting permission - prohibiting. |>>> See also curmi. |>>>
07:04 < mensi> officialdata
07:04 < gleki> jb: e'a
07:04 < mensi> e'a = e'a [interjection] — you may, I allow, e'a nai — prohibiting
07:04 < mensi> :e'a do klama lo nenri — You may come in.
07:04 < mensi> :zu'e e'a nai fagri — No fire allowed!
07:04 < mensi> :e'a nai crepu lo flora — You may not pick the flowers.
07:04 < mensi> :Related words: permite
07:04 < zipcpi> I've heard of {cikna} for "on", but that might be metaphorical
07:06 < zipcpi> Wuzzy has made some lujvo for these: http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/ca'arcadgau
07:06 < gleki> "on" for what?
07:06 < zipcpi> They're a bit long though, and basing them off {cando} is a bit counterintuitive
07:06 < gleki> en: ca'arcadgau
07:06 < mensi> ca'arcadgau [< cabra cando gasnu ≈ Apparatus idle bring about] = g1 (agent) turns device/apparatus g2=cab1=can1 off.
07:06 < zipcpi> "turned on"
07:06 < mensi> |>>> See also: turn on (=narca'acadgau), turned off (=ca'arcando). |>>> Wuzzy
07:06 < zipcpi> sorry
07:06 < zipcpi> I thought since we were talking about computers
07:06 < gleki> for aktygau then
07:07 < zipcpi> I'm a bit confused though, because something can be turned on *and* spofu
07:08 < gleki> explain
07:08 < zipcpi> Computer is turned on, but displaying BSOD or otherwise not functioning correctly?
07:09 < gleki> it's functioning
07:09 < gleki> en: akti
07:09 < mensi> akti = x1 is running service/in operation/performs functions x2; x1 is working, acting, active, in action |>>> See also
07:09 < mensi> ca'a se pilno, tolspofu |>>> gleki
07:09 < zipcpi> Yeah but I don't think you can say it isn't spofu
07:10 < gleki> akti ko'a gi'e spofu ko'e
07:10 < zipcpi> Hm
07:11 < zipcpi> Is it fine if I add "turned on" to the gloss of {akti} then?
07:11 < zipcpi> Then add {aktigau} and {to'aktigau}
07:12 < zipcpi> Well if I'm gonna shorten toly'akti that way might as well add {to'akti} too
07:14  * nuzba @frecafloros: lojbanの品詞は3つ    cmavo    brivla    cmene [http://bit.ly/1TdTPTB]
07:15 < gleki> once i proposed z- =.- for that. i.e. it'd be {tolzaktygau}
07:15 < zipcpi> Ah
07:15 < gleki> although in my translation i always just used nonlujvo style
07:15 < gleki> na akti
07:16 < gleki> oh you reminded me that i need to localize Skype
07:16 < gleki> although they will probably shut down offline version soon
07:19 < gleki> ei traduki 2847 linji
07:19 < zipcpi> Meh it might be time for some agglutinativity, relrafsi style... akti'yga. Not supported yet though, and needs to be defined properly
07:20 < gleki> en: gigle
07:20 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
07:20 < gleki> en: giggle
07:20 < mensi> [< gigdo gletu ≈ 1E9 fuck] 2 da se tolcri: mi'amli, mlimi'a
07:20 < gleki> en: giggl
07:20 < mensi> 2 da se tolcri: mi'amli, mlimi'a
07:20 < gleki> en: mi'amli
07:20 < mensi> mi'amli [< cmila milxe ≈ Laugh mild] = m1=c1 titters/chuckles/giggles. |>>> Synonym to mlimi'a. Cf. cmila, milxe. |>>>
07:20 < mensi> totus
07:20 < gleki> en: mlimi'a
07:20 < mensi> mlimi'a [< milxe cmila ≈ Mild laugh] = c1=m1 titters/chuckles/giggles. |>>> Synonym to mi'amli. Cf. cisma, mi'afra,
07:20 < mensi> mlimi'afra. |>>> sarefo
07:22 < gleki> .dict cash
07:22 < fenki> cash — noun: 1. Money in the form of notes/bills and coins, as opposed to cheques/checks or electronic transactions, 2. (informal) Money — verb: 1. (trans.) To exchange (a check/cheque) for money in the form of notes/bills, 2. (poker slang) To obtain a payout from a tournament
07:22 < gleki> en: cash
07:22 < mensi> 11 da se tolcri: bancuburu, bancubusu, nargrkaju, bankeve'a, bankevesu, bankevexe, bankexu'a, bankexunu, bankexu'o,
07:22 < mensi> spatrnakardiace, vlalikei
07:22 < zipcpi> certyzegase
07:23 < gleki> marji jdini?
07:23 < zipcpi> Maybe... though checks are marji too...
07:25 < gleki> are they jdini?
07:25 < gleki> not debts?
07:25 < zipcpi> I hand it to someone like I would money... not sure how that would be rendered though
07:27  * nuzba @CheshireOcelot: @heuristics solution: write all laws in Lojban. [http://bit.ly/1CiP731]
07:29 < gleki> 2800 strings to translate
07:30 < zipcpi> ko'a certyzegase ko'e ko'i ko'o -> ko'a sefsi lo ka ce'u certyzega ce'u ko'e ko'i ko'o -> ko'a sefsi lo ka fo'a fo'e ce'ai fo'a gasnu lo ka fo'e certyze ko'e ko'i ko'o -> ko'a sefsi lo ka fo'a fo'e ce'ai fo'a gasnu lo ka fo'e zenba lo ka ce'u certu ko'e ko'i kei ko'o
07:33 < zipcpi> coi jboku'ile zo'o
07:35 < gleki> щр ьню
07:35 < gleki> oh my
07:35 < zipcpi> Means roughly what crezenzu'e / crenzuue means
07:35 < zipcpi> See, even that lujvo isn't regular. Left out the sefsi
07:38 < gleki> which lujvo
07:39 < zipcpi> crezenzu'e
07:41 < zipcpi> So yeah, agglutinativity is powerful in numbers, but can be difficult to use
07:43 < gleki> zukte lo ka zenba lo ka  certu
07:43 < gleki> how else shuld it be
07:43 < zipcpi> lo ka ma zenba lo ka ma certu
07:44 < gleki> lo ka ce'u zenba
07:44 < gleki> zukte2 is ka
07:44 < zipcpi> Oh
07:44 < gleki> although with this tag proliferation it's
07:44 < gleki> zu'e zei'a certu
07:44 < zipcpi> u'i
07:46 < zipcpi> One nice thing about relrafsi though is that they are very regular. All words can be modified by -'yga. Gismu can be shortened as brodyga
07:46 < gleki> we need CV equivalents for guaspi \ and /
07:47 < zipcpi> None of the jvova'i shortening like cmibi'o and nurgau that obscure the first particle
07:50 < ctefaho> gleki: what where guaspi \ and / exactly? sounds? tones?
07:53 < ctefaho> looks like tones alright
07:55 < ctefaho> Why not just use them the same way;)
07:57 < noncomcinse> coi
08:08 < latro`a> coi
08:21 < noncomcinse> coi latro'a
08:41 < selpli> coi prenu
08:41 < noncomcinse> coi la selpli
08:41 < noncomcinse> do mo
08:43 < selpli> tatpi ru'e  .i caku ctemidju
08:44 < noncomcinse> ua
08:44 < gleki> ctefaho: / is like {be}. \ is the reverse
08:44 < gleki> so it's something like {zukte be zenba be certu}
08:45 < noncomcinse> .i mi ji'a tatpi ru'e ni'i nai lonu la .pavnon.nanc. tcika
08:45 < selpli> zo noncomcinse uanai
08:46 < noncomcinse> .i zo nonpamjveglecinse cu dukse loka barda co .irci cmene
08:47 < noncomcinse> .i lo go'i cu ve jmina zo nonpamcinse zo nonglecinse
08:50 < noncomcinse> jbo: nonglecinse
08:50 < mensi> nonglecinse [< no gletu cinse ≈ No gletu* cinse*] = .i x1 cinse fi loka ce'u gledji noda |>>>
08:50 < mensi> nejni-marji
08:50 < noncomcinse> jbo: nonpamcinse
08:50 < mensi> nonpamcinse [< no prami cinse ≈ No prami cinse*] = .i x1 cinse fi loka ce'u prami noda |>>>
08:50 < mensi> nejni-marji
08:51 < selpli> ua
08:53 < noncomcinse> .i ba'a cu'i lo so'e prenu na se slabu
08:54 < gleki> alta: zukte be zenba be certu
08:54 < mensi> ([FA ZOhE] [CU {<(¹zukte [be {FIhA ZOhE} BEhO]¹) (¹zenba [be {FIhA ZOhE} BEhO]¹)> <certu NF>} VAU])
08:55 < gleki> not sure this parse should be the correct one
09:06 < Amnadya> oi oi oi i lo soho cfila co itkuhile cu fanza je badryriha mi i mi xebni lonu senpi lodu inda loka setadni
09:07 < Amnadya> i mi sohiroipu lifri lo simsa pe la lojban
09:07 < noncomcinse> y
09:07 < Amnadya> i caronu sanji suho nalprane cu coha senpi rodapelobangu
09:08 < Amnadya> xu suhodo jimpe
09:09 < noncomcinse> bazi
09:09 < Amnadya> xu suho do dainmo
09:10 < noncomcinse> .i mi no'e cilre fi la .itku'ile bangu
09:10 < noncomcinse> .i mu'a dai ma cfila
09:10 < noncomcinse> je'e
09:11 < Amnadya> loseskicu bemi secinmo na steci la itkuhile
09:12 < noncomcinse> y
09:13 < noncomcinse> .i ja'o na jimpe
09:16 < gleki> mi dainmo i kuhi no bangu cu prane
09:16 < noncomcinse> .i ja'a go'i
09:16 < gleki> i kuhi la itkuiile zohu mi senpi lo nu le bangu cu poihi kahe se bangu keha
09:17 < Ilmen> loka troci cu.olkai loka tadji codjuno
09:18 < gleki> i taho ma smuni zohoi gleki la itkuiile
09:18 < gleki> ithkuil: gleki
09:18 < ithkuil> gleki: P1S1/STA-gl-ABS-UNI/ASO/U/DEL/NRM-FNC-IFL/UNFRAMED
09:18 < noncomcinse> .i xu djedi co rirni loka pilno zo'oi .h. .enai zo'oi .'.
09:18 < Amnadya> ko catlu lo vlaste
09:18 < gleki> laha
09:18 < Ilmen> rirni ji rirci
09:19 < Amnadya> mi senandu kihutuhalo fonxa
09:19 < gleki> lo crisa rirni cu rirci crino
09:19 < gleki> i ua
09:19 < Ilmen> coi ru'e ta'o
09:19 < noncomcinse> ie
09:19 < noncomcinse> lo'ai rirni sa'ai rirci le'ai
09:20 < gleki> Amnadya: xu do ca pilno lo pelji cukta lo ka tadni le bankixada
09:21 < Amnadya> laha lonu cikre la itkuhile cu cumki ikuhi lofinti nalaha djica
09:21 < Amnadya> i jahapilno lo pelji
09:24 < gleki> gau do ehu la tohanzu cu gletu la itkuiile
09:25 < gleki> gi'e cupra lo panzi
09:30 < Amnadya> mi nelci lo zabna pagbu be ihy ikuhi lo nu ropagbu cu prane sahenai cusarcu lonu mi panpi
09:31 < Amnadya> i lojbobau cusimsa
09:32 < Amnadya> mi pupensi lonu jbobau itkuhile mixre
09:32 < gleki> oi oi
09:32 < gleki> i lo tarmi be lo ibu valsi cu klina
09:32 < Amnadya> cinri falonudostidi tuha la tohanzu
09:32 < gleki> i kuhi lo tarmi be lo lojbo bridi kahe kalsa
09:32 < Amnadya> ie
09:33 < gleki> i da itkuiile ke valsi morna
09:33 < gleki> sisi rafsi morna
09:36 < gleki> i krinu  lo nu mi na nelci lo lujvo
09:36 < mensi> i mi i mi i mi mo i mi na nelci
09:37 < Amnadya> mi na toltugni
09:48 < Amnadya> xusuho cinri buhu la jboguhe caho fasnu
10:21 < gleki> y
10:21 < Amnadya> mo
10:21 < gleki> mi mo'u finti lo zmiku be  loka zbasu lo glico bi'o lojbo vlaste
10:21 < gleki> i do pu kucli tua lonuzba
10:21 < gleki> i mi spuda
10:21 < Amnadya> ieie
10:21 < gleki> i jia mi favgau la altatufa
10:22 < gleki> alta: bai fa mi mo
10:22 < mensi> ([{bai ZOhE} {fa mi}] [CU {mo VAU}])
10:22 < gleki> za'adai zo ku na se setca
10:22 < gleki> i zo zo'e se setca
10:22 < Amnadya> sahenei do zukte zuhinedo
10:22 < Amnadya> sahenai
10:23 < gleki> alta: lo brodi brode ui ne do cu brodi brodu
10:23 < mensi> ([FA {lo <(¹brodi [brode {NF ui}]¹) (¹ne [FIhA do] GEhU¹)> KU}] [cu {brodi <brodu NF>} VAU])
10:23 < gleki> zo'oi NF ce zo'oi VAU sinxa lo tertau genrverbu
10:23 < gleki> i vajni te frica
10:23 < gleki> gloss: lo dansu cu dansu
10:23 < mensi> A(n) dancer(s): dance(s)
10:24 < gleki> zo'oi dancer i ku'i zo'oi dance
10:24 < gleki> i ku'i mi nu'o setca lo vlaste la mensi
10:24 < gleki> i ji'a mi milxe ciska lo ve ciksi be tu'a zo le ce zo dei ce zo pe ce zo co'e ce zo sko'opu
10:25 < gleki> i mu'a lu do'e nai dei lo mlatu cu pinxe lo ladru li'u
10:30 < gleki> alta: coi mlatu
10:30 < mensi> ([coi {LO <mlatu NF> KU} DOhU] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
10:30 < gleki> zo la zmiku se setca
10:30 < gleki> sa
10:30 < gleki> i zo lo zmiku se setca
10:30 < gleki> alta: ma nuzba coi
10:30 < mensi> ([FA ma] [CU {<nuzba NF> <coi DO DOhU>} VAU])
10:30 < gleki> zo do se setca
10:31 < gleki> i ca ti lo doi zei sumti na ka'e kunti
10:31 < gleki> i ku'i la cilretci zo'u mi na favgau i bebna tutci
10:37 < Amnadya2> lodrata cumo
10:40 < akmnlrse> gleki: de'a fanva .i lo (to pu zu toi) mo'u se fanva cu cmalu sai gi'e pagbu la'oi toolkit
10:40 < akmnlrse> mensi: doi ilmen|menli|samcinki s/ro/ru/
10:40 < mensi> akmnlrse: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.ilmen|menli|samcinki.gy. di'a cusku da
10:40 < akmnlrse> Amnadya2: lo kibro nu vitci zo'u xu do se slabu la'oi mosh ne la'e di'e https://mosh.mit.edu http://dan.drown.org/android/mosh/
10:41 < Amnadya2> taho mi ca  se slabu gaje lo modality rafsi gi lo vocalic aspectual rafsi
10:41 < Amnadya2> na slabu doi
10:42 < Amnadya2> i lo fonxa na seponse mi i lomemimoi nakibro jena android
10:42 < akmnlrse> je'e
10:47 < akmnlrse> .i tu'a lo drata zo'u: clugau lo cmavo canlu
10:47 < akmnlrse> vau ge'e
10:52 < noncomcinse> coi ru'e
10:52 < akmnlrse> condi pruce
10:53 < noncomcinse> coi la .akmnlrse
10:54 < akmnlrse> ze'i ku lo jbogu'e di'a se bangu lo lojbo
10:56 < akmnlrse> ... zo di'a co'e
10:56 < gleki> lo drata poi mo cu mokau
10:56 < akmnlrse> ma ka mo kau
10:56 < gleki> 10:37 < Amnadya2> lodrata cumo
10:57 < akmnlrse> ua
10:57 < gleki> i do de'a fanva i je'e i mi ca lo cabdei pu ze'i fanva zo'ei la skaip
10:58 < noncomcinse> .i ma xu djuno lodu zo kau cu mo kau kei je nu makau klama lo zarci vau vau pau pei
10:58 < akmnlrse> ma ni barda
10:58 < gleki> i la faglo'u zo'u a'o rauva'ei simsa la vivaldis
10:58 < noncomcinse> en: va'ei
10:58 < mensi> va'ei = [ROI] converts number to scalar tag; specifies the value on fuzzy logic scale; to the degree (n) on scale ...
10:58 < mensi> |>>> gleki
10:58 < gleki> i la skaip zo'u ei 2800 linji cu se fanva
10:58 < akmnlrse> kufra ja'o
10:59 < akmnlrse> ru'a
10:59 < noncomcinse> .i ma brauzero gi'e se pilno do doi la gleki
10:59 < gleki> ie na barda
10:59 < gleki> i y mi so'aroi pilno la krom i ku'i mi ru'inai troci la vivaldis
10:59 < gleki> i V nu'o bredi vau li'a
11:00 < gleki> i ku'i mi tcenelci lo ka zgana lo lojbo je se fanva ke uidje linji
11:00 < noncomcinse> .i mi na se melbi vy
11:00 < noncomcinse> .i pilno fyly
11:00 < gleki> vy ca'a se favgau
11:01 < gleki> i a'o ba melbi lo so'imei
11:02 < akmnlrse> pu ze'i ku mi troci lo ka gau ce loi ro uenzi pe lo pa cankyuidje cu gendra .i la'a na ga sarcu gi frili jai banzuka
11:02 < gleki> y srana ma poi proga
11:03 < noncomcinse> .i mi na mutce nelci lo za'e tanbrflato larcu
11:03 < akmnlrse> la faglo'u
11:03 < Amnadya2> lo mi krom cu spofu sai sei cunso pinka
11:03 < Amnadya2> i mi tahe pilno la faglohu
11:03 < gleki> noncomcinse: xu do tavla fi vy
11:03 < noncomcinse> .i go'i
11:04 < gleki> i a'o ba co'a ka'e stika lo morna be lo vy canko
11:04 < noncomcinse> .i da'i ganai vy. pilno la'oi .GTK+. gi mi zukyjdipei co troci co pilno
11:04 < gleki> noncomcinse: xu do pu'i zanru lo preti pe ju'oi http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
11:05 < gleki> i ei zanru lo mu preti
11:05 < noncomcinse> .i .i'e ie zanru
11:06 < gleki> do pu'i xu zanru
11:06 < noncomcinse> y
11:07 < gleki> i va'i ru'e je'u pei do pu zanru mu preti
11:07 < Amnadya2> smunambigu fazo zanru
11:07 < noncomcinse> .i mi na se jaspu fi sy.o'y
11:07 < noncomcinse> sa fi sy .e'y
11:08 < gleki> e'o do co'a se jaspu gi'e zanru cuxna lo mu preti
11:08 < noncomcinse> .ai
11:08 < Amnadya2> ijehu lonu zanru nasarcu lonu zanru cohe
11:08 < noncomcinse> vi'o ba
11:10 < noncomcinse> .i ni'o xu zasti fa lo samselpla poi co'e lonu lo se ciska se cusku cu binxo lo voksa se cusku
11:10 < Amnadya2> ispik
11:11 < akmnlrse> espeak -v jbo
11:12 < noncomcinse> .i .ai pilno
11:12 < akmnlrse> lo voksa cu fegli (to ku'i no da feglyme'a toi)
11:12 < noncomcinse> ki'e re .a'y
11:15 < Amnadya> re boi ahy
11:15 < akmnlrse> oi oi oi
11:16 < noncomcinse> .i mi mo'ifli co famyma'o vau
11:16 < Amnadya> ikuhi ehu lu kihe lo re me ahy lihu
11:17 < noncomcinse> .i ku'i lu re.a'y li'u ka'e lerfu fi re boi .a'y
11:18 < akmnlrse> va'o de'u na co'e .i no da ku'antora je cu se sko'opu lo de'u mupli
11:19 < noncomcinse> .i jetnu
11:21 < noncomcinse> .i lo mi skami na ka'e kibro pilno .ije ku'i mi jinvi lodu mi pu samcpacu lo se nitcu be la'oi .eSpeak.
11:23 < akmnlrse> ru'a su'o .linuks. gunma cu voi lo cnano mupli be ki cu se pagbu la .ispik.
11:24 < noncomcinse> .i ma cnino se smuni zo voi
11:24 < akmnlrse> lo me zo poi'i moi
11:24 < akmnlrse> s/se //
11:24 < fenki> akmnlrse meant to say: ru'a su'o .linuks. gunma cu voi lo cnano mupli be ki cu pagbu la .ispik.
11:24 < akmnlrse> ...
11:25 < noncomcinse> .i simsa zo poi'i ba'a nai
11:25 < noncomcinse> en: poi'i
11:25 < Amnadya> ahaha
11:25 < mensi> poi'i = [NU] x1 is such that poi'i abstraction is true; x1 binds ke'a within the abstraction.  |>>> Originally proposed
11:25 < mensi> by And Rosta around 2001. |>>> selpahi
11:27 < noncomcinse> exp: ru'a su'o .linuks. gunma cu poi'i lo cnano mupli be ke'a cu pagbu la .ispik.
11:27 < mensi> (ru'a [{su'o BOI} {linuks gunma} KU] [cu {poi'i <(¹lo [cnano {mupli <be ke'a BEhO>}] KU¹) (¹cu [pagbu {la ispik KU} VAU]¹)> KEI} VAU])
11:27 < noncomcinse> ua
11:28 < noncomcinse> .i ie
11:31 < noncomcinse> .i .oi sai mi nalmo'i lodu makau tadji co namcu
11:32 < akmnlrse> ta'u mo
11:32 < noncomcinse> .i fu'o pau da'i zasti fa lo ci gerku .i lo re gerku cu batci lo nanmu .i xo lo xo gerku cu batci lo nanmu
11:33 < Amnadya> pehi buho sarcu falonu se slabu ro kau rafsi pela gredile 5moi i lo tadji pelonu re pagbu gredile kupoho se cilre na banzu je jaha xlali ikuhi y laha mi tavla lo nomei
11:34 < Amnadya> re lo ci gerku cu batci
11:34 < noncomcinse> ki'e
11:34 < noncomcinse> fu'e
11:37 < noncomcinse> camxes: .i mi klama feku lo zdani
11:37 < camxes> (i [mi CU] [klama {<fe ku> <lo zdani KU>} VAU])
11:37 < noncomcinse> camxes: .i mi fe klama lo zdani
11:37 < camxes> (i [{mi <fe KU>} CU] [klama {lo zdani KU} VAU])
11:37 < noncomcinse> exp: fe klama lo zarci
11:37 < mensi> (CU [fe klama] [lo zarci KU] VAU)
11:37 < noncomcinse> .uat.
11:38 < akmnlrse> xu lo pa moi cu sinxa lo du'u klama ba'ei fi lo zdani
11:38 < akmnlrse> spagetufa: klama fe ku lo zdani
11:38 < spagetufa> (CU [klama {<(¹fe ku¹) (¹FI [lo zdani KU]¹)> VAU}])
11:38 < Amnadya> la selp puzu stidi ije la tsani pu zanru
11:39 < akmnlrse> je'e
11:39 < noncomcinse> .i mi se cfipa zoi .camxes. [fe klama] .camxes.
11:39 < akmnlrse> zo fe va'o lo cipra gerna ka'e selbritcita
11:40 < akmnlrse> exp: jai fa broda .i fa bo co'e
11:40 < mensi> ([CU {jai fa broda} VAU] [i fa bo {CU <co'e VAU>}])
11:40 < noncomcinse> .i ma smuni
11:40 < Amnadya> ithkuil: selp
11:40 < ithkuil> selp: P1S1/STA-s-ABS-DCT/VAR/U/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
11:40 < akmnlrse> na djuno
11:40 < noncomcinse> .i febu klama pe'a ma
11:41 < akmnlrse> .i ka'e se jalge lo nu lo brirebla cu se tolfa'o tu'a fi bu
11:42 < gleki> loi xelso pu'i cusku zo'oi nai i smuni dunli zo nai
11:42 < Amnadya> koi lasuda finti lo itkuhile vlaste irci bo zmiku
11:43 < gleki> i oise'i
11:43 < gleki> loi xelso pu'i cusku zo'oi nai i smuni to'e dunli zo nai
11:43 < gleki> i dukti
11:44 < noncomcinse> .i se xi fai bu jai cfipa :: fa loka ce'u na ka'e jimpe ke'a kei, fe lo glipre, fai la .lojban.
11:44 < noncomcinse> .i ua pei
11:45 < akmnlrse> .u'i
11:46 < akmnlrse> .i xu lo cfipu ka'e zilkai
11:46 < noncomcinse> (lo'ai cfipa sa'ai cfipu le'ai)
11:47 < akmnlrse> cu'u la gleki: ".i do je'a xu se cfipu lo ka ca ma kau jai gau cfari .ei"
11:47 < noncomcinse> .i go'oi zilkai
11:47 < noncomcinse> .i mi zukyjdipei co finti co menli selkei bau la .lojban.
11:48 < akmnlrse> .i lo .korp. nu sisku zo'u za'a 7 roi tai pilno
11:48 < akmnlrse> .i .a'u
11:49 < noncomcinse> en: tai
11:49 < mensi> tai = [BAI] tamsmi modal, 1st place (like)/(in manner 2)      resembling ...; sharing ideal form ... |>>> tamsmi is x1
11:49 < mensi> resembles x2 sharing ideal form/shape x3 in property x4 |>>> officialdata
11:49 < Amnadya> xudo cnino me la tsani i do zo co sohiroi pilno
11:50 < noncomcinse> .i mi se slabu la tsani xoi puzu cfari se'u
11:50 < Amnadya> caho carvi fi lo dilnu
11:51 < noncomcinse> ma poi drata cu te carvi
11:51 < Amnadya> ro te farlu
11:52 < Amnadya> i eipiei mi spuda fi lu lo romei lihu
11:52 < noncomcinse> ie nai ru'e
11:52 < Amnadya> mo zo cavluhi
11:53 < noncomcinse> ua ie
11:53 < Amnadya> nu lumci lo carvi
11:54 < Amnadya> cinri pixra
11:55 < Amnadya> sei mo lo itkuhile tadni cu uhe laznymau lo lojbo
11:56 < Amnadya> noda troci
11:57 < Amnadya> mi bebna laha loka troci
11:57 < Amnadya> nonseka i ma prali
11:59 < gleki> lo nu gau gletu la to'anzu
11:59 < Amnadya> ma prali
12:00 < Amnadya> lo itkuhile cecmu xaho zasti
12:00 < gleki> lo nu lo prane bangu co'a zasti
12:00 < gleki> i ibu na prane ba'a
12:00 < Amnadya> nasaiprane
12:01 < Amnadya> i kuhi ty jiha nasai prane
12:01 < gleki> za'adai ba'anaidai mi pu karbi ibu lo lojban
12:01 < gleki> sisi la lojban
12:01 < gleki> i su'ova'ei cinri
12:05 < Amnadya> zoho vaholonu mi certu la itkuhile kei mi kakne loka ctuca lo fenki vukro
12:05 < gleki> uanai
12:05 < gleki> i fy vy mo
12:06 < Amnadya> vukro gunma lo itkuhile tadni i y do djuno
12:07 < Amnadya> la kixadas pu vitke
12:07 < gleki> i ua
12:07 < gleki> i ju'oru'e co'u tadni
12:07 < Amnadya> lakne
12:09 < Amnadya> jaho oi noda ba se ctuca mi
12:12 < gleki> i ku'i ju'o cumki fa lo nu lanli gi'e jmina lo se claxu la lojban
12:12 < gleki> i mi deia jundi
12:12 < Amnadya> jeie
12:46  * nuzba @bgcarlisle: Sunscreen = {solri jelcagna fanta}? #lojban [http://bit.ly/1evSoR9]
12:51 < jcowan> coi rodo
12:52 < Zearen> .i coi
12:52 < clakre> coi jcowan!
12:54 < zipcpi> http://genius.com/Djemynai-prami-simbio-english-translation-lyrics/# How did I do?
12:58 < Zearen> .i mi sampla gi'e ve skina  fo la'o gy. Steven Universe gy.
13:11 < akmnlrse> zipcpi: lu "i tai tau la oz lo carbi'e mi bevri lo nu'o se zvati" li'u zo'u jufra pa mei
13:11 < akmnlrse> .i lo drata pagbu zo'u pe'i zabna
13:11 < zipcpi> Oh
13:11 < zipcpi> za'a mi srera lo ka mensepli le jufra
13:13 < zipcpi> mo'u stika
13:30  * akmnlrse ca'o co'e la'au za'o lo fanmo li'u
13:30 < akmnlrse> .i lu ".i do traji lo ka ce xo kau da pe mi traji" li'u jai nandu
13:31 < zipcpi> u'i
13:32 < zipcpi> nandu mi ji'a
13:45 < zipcpi> OK {aktigau} and {na'aktigau} added
13:58 < zipcpi> vlaste: xaste (gimka)
13:58 < vlaste> zo xaste gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo xaste gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
13:58 < zipcpi> No open rafsi there though
14:20 < zipcpi> dijysenta? I think we just follow whatever rules the building has, including skipping "bad numbers" due to superstition or whatnot. It's too tedious to renumber every building for some logical system
14:22 < zipcpi> (about building floors. Personally I like ground = 0; probably due to malkluxlu, but basement = negative numbers make sense
14:33 < Bass> Hello! Could you please help me? I'm new to Lojban and trying translate phrase "Growing human" into Lojban. Is "remna banro" the correct translation?
14:34 < zipcpi> What's the sentence?
14:36 < Bass> There is no sentence. The meaning is: this human in the process of growing, physical and intellectual development
14:37 < zipcpi> lo remna poi banro then, perhaps
14:37 < Bass> thank you!
14:38 < phma> or "lo banro remna"
14:38 < phma> coi .bas.
14:43 < Bass> If I mean a specific person, should I use le instead of lo?
14:44 < phma> yes
14:45 < phma> you can still use lo, there is some overlap
14:45 < zipcpi> lo won't be wrong either, but it's a bit more vague, since it could also mean "people, in general"
14:45 < zipcpi> depending on context
14:48 < Bass> Is there cases when I can omit descriptors?
14:48 < zipcpi> You mean like using {lo} / {le} without a selbri?
14:48 < zipcpi> Right now you can't; you have to use something like {le co'e}
14:49 < Bass> Aha, thanks!
14:49 < zipcpi> I tend to switch to {le} for a specific person, and {lo'e} for people in general, while using {lo} for "a / some people". Some people just stick with {lo} though
14:51 < latro`a> le is "backwards" in its specificity relative to english: {le} means *you* have whatever the thing is in mind, "the" means the *listener* (and probably also you) has it in mind
14:51 < phma> If it's going to be the title of something, you could omit the article, and just say "banro remna".
14:51 < zipcpi> Right that
14:52 < phma> so when you start a story, in English, you say "a thingamajig" the first time, and "the thingamajig" thereafter.
14:52 < phma> in Lojban you say "le comdaidza" the first time and "le comdaidza" thereafter.
14:53 < phma> Whether it's a previously mentioned thing (which is independent of the definiteness of the article) is expressed with "bi'u(nai)".
15:01 < Bass> Thank you so much! It was really helpful. Hope that I'll have enough time to continue my introduction to Lojban
15:01 < zipcpi> I have some crazy ideas for elidable co'e; le ku, le vu ku, le nu ku; but you should probably be careful how much time you spend with me, lest I infect you with all these weird experimental ideas not yet accepted by any parser (well except the alta parser, but the alta parser accepts a lot of things)
15:02 < Amnadya2> All about that Bass
15:02 < zipcpi> Heh
15:04 < Amnadya2> alta: mi nelci ge gi
15:04 < mensi> ([FA mi] [CU {nelci NF} {ge <FIhA ZOhE> gi <FIhA ZOhE>} VAU])
15:08 < zipcpi> alta: do nitcu fe po'o lo nu penmi le ninmu bu'u le vu
15:08 < mensi> ([FA do] [CU {nitcu NF} {<fe po'o> <lo (¹nu [{FA ZOhE} {CU <penmi NF> <(²FE [le {ninmu NF} KU]²) (²bu'u [le {vu COhE} KU]²)> VAU}] KEI¹) KU>} VAU])
15:08 < zipcpi> jo'au CKT: do nitcu fe po'o lo nu penmi le ninmu zai le vu
15:09 < zipcpi> Still three syllables compared to English "there", but, meh
15:09 < Amnadya2> zai tu
15:10 < zipcpi> I've been told though that if you can't actually signal that place, {tu} doesn't work. Of course though, Lojbanists differ on how pedantic they want demonstratives to be :p
15:12 < zipcpi> I like {zai} cause I learned Chinese lol
15:12 < Amnadya2> yep. nice cognate
15:14 < Amnadya2> but unlike nau its not a direct borrowing (meh), but simply comes from zvati
15:14 < zipcpi> I know
15:15 < Amnadya2> just saying thats why i like zai
15:16 < zipcpi> I don't even know about {nau} anymore. "here and now"? How to separate the two? For utility I think {nau'u} is better. {ca nau'u}, {zai nau'u}. I almost want to CKTJ it with nau lol
15:16 < phma> "zai tu"? you're switching to yonder alphabet?
15:16 < zipcpi> CKTJ
15:16 < zipcpi> I did label it :p
15:18 < phma> what's CKTJ?
15:19 < zipcpi> "ce ki tau jau"; a dialect, or fork if you will, that switches some common longer cmavo with rarer shorter cmavo
15:19 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ce_ki_tau_jau
15:26 < Amnadya2> doi la zipcpi i xu do se cinri lonudo fanva suho lisri
15:27 < Amnadya2> i pagbu loka jbopre
15:27 < zipcpi> u'i
15:28 < zipcpi> Watership Down?
15:29 < phma> xu lo do karce cu xrududu?
15:30 < zipcpi> u'i
15:30 < zipcpi> I expect to use {me'oi} a lot there
15:37 < zipcpi> Oh by the way, how does Lojban handle footnotes? My thinking is that it's a mere typographical convention to move {to ... toi} group out of the main text
15:38 < zipcpi> i.e. when narrating, the narrator can either choose to utter the footnote as {to ... toi}, or leave it out altogether
15:39 < phma> In the Bible translation, I'm using the \f tag, just like any other language.
15:39 < phma> When lettering footnotes, do we count the apostrophe as a letter?
15:40 < zipcpi> u'i
15:45 < phma> lu mi me me'o y'y gi'e me me'o zy li'u pei
15:45 < zipcpi> ki'a
15:46 < zipcpi> ki'abu'onai
15:46 < phma> The Greek says "I am Alpha and Omega", the Aramaic says "I am Alaf and Taw"
15:47 < zipcpi> I would render it something like {mi roda tolfa'o gi'e fanmo}, but I'm horrible at replacing metaphors that way :p
15:48 < phma> Metaphors be with you!
15:48 < zipcpi> Well I suppose my sentence is a metaphor as well; just replacing it with one with a different literal meaning
15:51 < zipcpi> Is ' considered the first letter though simply because of computer sort? :p
15:52 < phma> yes. where would you put it?
15:53 < zipcpi> If it weren't I might put it at the end
15:54 < zipcpi> Sort of where & used to be in the old days
15:54 < zipcpi> Not even sure why they needed to consider it a letter lol
15:54 < zipcpi> & that is, not Lojban-'
16:00 < zipcpi> I might prefer numbered footnotes for Lojban, just cause, but that might not work so well for the Bible, what with verse numbers and all
16:06 < zipcpi> exp: broda brodo brodi cei brodu
16:06 < mensi> (CU [broda brodo {brodi <cei brodu>}] VAU)
16:06 < zipcpi> Huh
16:06 < zipcpi> exp: ke broda brodo brodi ke'e cei brodu
16:06 < mensi> (CU [{ke <broda brodo brodi> ke'e} {cei brodu}] VAU)
16:06 < zipcpi> Rather heavy-handed
16:07 < zipcpi> alta: ke broda brodo brodi ke'e cei brodu
16:07 < mensi> ([FA ZOhE] [CU {<ke (¹[broda brodo] [brodi NF]¹) ke'e> <cei (¹brodu NF¹)>} VAU])
16:15 < ctefaho> So today I learned that I happen to put [ː] everywhere in my jbo-speech
16:15 < ctefaho> What did you learn regarding jbo today?
16:20 < latro`a> zipcpi, that problem is part of why I suggested VAU CEI a long time ago
16:21 < latro`a> (that and the fact that we realized that cei should really bind pro-bridi, not pro-selbri)
16:21 < zipcpi> ua
16:25 < zipcpi> In Malay the seat of emotion is metaphorically centered on the liver, not the heart
16:26 < zipcpi> {livga}
16:26 < zipcpi> Malay "hati"
17:00 < ctefaho> co'o
17:04  * nuzba @Dank_scriptor: ca lo nu nalbirti kei na zukte gi'enai pensi .i e'usai     #lojban [http://bit.ly/1KEJOgL]
17:04  * nuzba @Dank_scriptor: ca lo nu nalbirti kei do na zukte gi'enai pensi .i e'usai      #lojban [http://bit.ly/1KEJTB1]
17:32  * nuzba @ftrain: the answer is obviously more Lojban https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban [http://bit.ly/1KEMoDv]
17:38  * nuzba @MmichaelLlucy: @ftrain if the answer is Lojban the real answer is that you need a different question [http://bit.ly/1KEMP0w]
17:38  * nuzba @dan_schmidt: @ftrain I love that Lojban was invented because Loglan, the most hardcore invented language ever, was not hardcore enough. [http://bit.ly/1KEMMSk]
17:40  * nuzba @ftrain: if we all spoke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban then it's entirely possible we could eliminate microformats http://t.co/9aOufQboyw [http://bit.ly/1M5g6Pg]
17:48  * nuzba @ohlookyhere: can you make puns in lojban tho [http://bit.ly/1KENXl1]
17:50 < zipcpi> Rhymes... assonances... making silly words like ci'onme'a... :p
18:10 < _mukti_> .i lo xebni na'o xebni .i lo cpacu na'o cpacu .i sa'u mi desku
19:10  * nuzba @kevinmarks: @ftrain json-ld is actually an anagram of lojban [http://bit.ly/1Cff1nS]
19:42  * nuzba @mkmagicannon: @ftrain @lojytan_bot If we all spoke Lojban .inaja su ko na'e troci lo nu tcidu ti [http://bit.ly/1dGzGWj]
20:17 < Mr> Can someone help me learn this?
23:12 < gleki> this?
23:12 -!- Irssi: #lojban: Total of 147 nicks [2 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 145 normal]
23:12 < gleki> oh left
23:13 < gleki> krasi: zvati
23:13 < mensi> zvati = .i zo'oi zai banzuxe'o .i zo'oi at bangenugu .i zo'oi upastit banxe'inu .i zo'oi asist bansupu'a .i zo'oi
23:13 < mensi> prisutstvav banru'usu .i zo'oi xadir bangaru'a
23:14 < gleki> zvati does come from chinese "zai"
23:36 < gleki> en: mister
23:36 < mensi> naun = Mr./Mister
--- Day changed Mon Jul 06 2015
00:26  * nuzba @uitki: L17-01 - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/L17-01 by Gleki - /* Space: &quot;to the left&quot;, &quot;to the right&quot; */ [http://bit.ly/1H3AOuF]
01:29  * nuzba @uitki: Mumble - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Mumble by Gleki - /* Servers */ [http://bit.ly/1H9OMON]
02:40 < ctefaho> coi
02:41 < gleki> coi
02:44 < dutchie> coi
02:45 < gleki> xu doi datci do dotco 
02:48 < dutchie> na go'i .i mi glico
02:49 < dutchie> zoi gy. Josh Holland gy. cmene mi
02:51 < dutchie> .iseki'ubo bau lo glibau mi se cmene zo'oi dutchie
03:06 < gleki> xe'e
03:37 < teleological> coi .a'e cu'i
03:42 < gleki> ue
03:43 < _mukti_> coi la gleki
03:44 < gleki> lo nu stika lo uitki papri cu masno
03:44 < _mukti_> ue nai ui nai
03:45 < _mukti_> You asked if it might be the same thing as what made tiki slow. I haven't investigated, but I suspect not for this reason:
03:45 < _mukti_> Tiki was slow because it lacked a mechanism (in the version we were using) to send email asynchronously. Mediawiki has that -- it's the queue that got backed up.
03:45 < gleki> https://github.com/lojban/lmw/blob/master/README.md
03:46 < gleki> e'u ma'a jmina lo drata nabmi se skicu
03:46 < _mukti_> ai
03:46 < _mukti_> mi ckire do lo nu finti
03:52 < gleki> oi i mutce masno
03:53 < gleki> i xu le selfu skami ca zbasu lo snura fukpi
03:54 < _mukti_> .a'a mi ba facki
03:55 < _mukti_> ue
03:55 < _mukti_> mutce lo ka tolcando
03:55 < _mukti_> .i tu'a lo snura fukpi cu na fasnu
03:58 < _mukti_> There are a number of busy PHP procs. I will restart the master process. Let's see if that improves performance.
03:58 < _mukti_> Restarted. uo
03:59 < _mukti_> If this approach works, we may need to tune PHP.
04:00 < _mukti_> It may be that we're allowing too many child processes for the amount of available memory, and that old processes may need to be more agressively pruned.
04:01 < gleki> again slow
04:01 < gleki> im trying to save a page gain
04:01 < gleki> well faster than the previous attempt
04:02 < _mukti_> If performance is critical, we may need to revisit the way we're doing internationalization. It's clever, but I can see where it might cause performance issues.
04:03 < _mukti_> Also, we have a ton of extensions installed. Lots of opportunities for drag there.
04:04 < gleki> my, even opening the pages is slow
04:04 < gleki> i cant open lmw atm
04:04 < gleki> in fact it's down
04:06  * nuzba @uitki: proga:LMW - Lojbanic MediaWiki - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/proga:LMW_-_Lojbanic_MediaWiki by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1J0e7J4]
04:40 < lablanu> Is there a PEG grammar for Lojban that follows this form? https://github.com/PhilippeSigaud/Pegged#usage
04:43 < gleki> no but i guess you may ask them in Issues on how to convert it from standard notation
04:44 < gleki> or how it is related to other notations
05:43 < f8l> I knew I know this name! It’s the author of ‘D Templates Tutorial’.
05:44 < dutchie> ki'a
06:28  * nuzba @palkeo: kalama musi Nasa ni li pona tawa mi : https://djemynai.bandcamp.com/album/zao kalama musi ante li kin pona : toki Lojban li kute sama toki Hebrew. [http://bit.ly/1HaxuRp]
06:28  * nuzba @palkeo: kalama musi Nasa li pona tawa mi : https://djemynai.bandcamp.com/album/zao kalama musi ante li kin pona : toki Lojban li kute sama toki Hebrew. [http://bit.ly/1gjkDUk]
06:43 < Amnadya> coi
06:44 < Amnadya> coi la mensi
06:45 < Amnadya> tatoeba: omni
06:53  * nuzba @shukil026: Lojban [http://bit.ly/1HaB2mH]
06:55 < Amnadya> mo lahau losenelci jelomelbi lihu
07:00 < Amnadya> afaict in lojban you can reverse e.g. kahe diha -> diha kahe to reverse the meaning whereas you cant in ithkuil
07:01 < Amnadya> so you'd have to use a subclause and selbri for the other meaning
07:01 < Amnadya> and it seems you cant stack tenses like in lojban
07:03 < Amnadya> i also found a scope error in the grammar
07:03 < Amnadya> unless the grammar is wrong and not the example
07:03 < Amnadya> bbl
07:06 < gleki> Tatoeba: omni
07:06 < mensi> no da se tolcri
07:06 < gleki> Tatoeba: coi
07:06 < mensi> coi do zukte ma [1896005]
07:07 < gleki> i ei ningau lo datni sorcu
07:07 < gleki> i ku'i
07:07 < gleki> le tutci pe la mupli je la mensi cu bebna
07:07 < gleki> i oi la amnadiia mo'u cliva
07:43 < csarven> <http://csarven.ca/#i> foaf:name "Sarven Capadisli" .
07:43 < gleki> ызфь
07:43 < gleki> spam
07:45 < csarven> gleki No! It is a statement using the RDF language, which happens to contains the triple: subject, verb, object :)
07:45 < gleki> o'u
07:46 < gleki> i completely forgot RDF
07:46 < gleki> i saw no use of it.
07:46 < gleki> maybe use it in LMW somehow?
07:46 < csarven> LMW?
07:46 < gleki> it's usable together with Semantic Mediawiki isnt it?
07:46 < gleki> LMW = mw.lojban.org
07:46 < gleki> lojbanic mediawiki
07:47 < csarven> I suppose so
09:40 < gleki> en:vimstizu
09:40 < mensi> vimstizu [< vikmi stizu ≈ Excrete chair] = s1 is a toilet for v1 to excrete v2 from source v3 via means/route
09:40 < mensi> v4
09:40 < gleki> but why chair
09:40 < gleki> then what is toilet sink
09:43 < hilmi-can> hey ive been to the chat once until now
09:44 < gleki> ok
09:44 < hilmi-can> i bought the book by cohen a time ago, i very much appreciate everybody  trying to keep this language alive thumbs up
09:45 < ldlework> coi hilmi-can
09:45 < gleki> if you want to support lojban pls spend a minute registering here and upvoting questions with rating below 10 area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
09:45 < hilmi-can> getting confused with vocabulary, there are several lists… i could not manage finding the right one the get started really
09:45 < gleki> in reply we'll answer all your questions about lojban :)
09:45  * gleki although we'll answer them anyway
09:46 < ldlework> hilmi-can: there are two sides of the lexicon to study, the predicates, and the articles
09:46 < ldlework> hilmi-can: probably the best way to learn the predicates is to study them on memrise or similar service
09:46 < ldlework> http://www.memrise.com/course/17295/gismu-frequency-order/
09:46 < hilmi-can> thx
09:46 < hilmi-can> and yes i will check the questions
09:46 < ldlework> The best way to learn the articles is to study the grammar such as in the CLL http://mw.lojban.org/papri/the_Complete_Lojban_Language
09:47 < gleki> if you really want dictionaries then there are two: http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/ircbot/dumps/lojban-en.pdf and http://mw.lojban.org/papri/La_Bangu:_Lojban_Dictionary_with_Examples
09:47 < hilmi-can> i am doing the book already!
09:47 < ldlework> hilmi-can: but nothing beats just staying involved with the community and just jumping into reading and writing lojban
09:47 < ldlework> and asking questions here
09:48 < gleki> indeed. languages are usually learnt iwht the help of other people.
09:49 < ldlework> gleki: is the la bangu dictionary quite modified from the standard dictionary?
09:49 < hilmi-can> i ver much appreciate your enthusiasm
09:49 < gleki> ldlework: it really tried not to
09:49 < clakre> gleki, what did you mean about what is a toilet sink?
09:49 < gleki> ldlework: some rare places were omitted as the preface says
09:49 < clakre> like a sink for washing hands in the bathroom? English just calls that a sink
09:50 < gleki> clakre: no, i mean toilet pan =lavatory bowl
09:52 < clakre> google seems to think a lavatory bowl is the basin for the sink where we wash hands
09:52 < clakre> this must be a cultural difference
09:52 < gleki> i just meant "toilet" is ambiguous
09:52 < gleki> .dict water closet
09:52 < fenki> water closet — noun: 1. (chiefly UK) a flush toilet, or the room, in a public place, containing one
09:52 < gleki> the key word here is "or"
09:53 < clakre> ok, so the gloss for vimstizu is not specific enough
09:53 < clakre> but the meaning is obvious from the component gismu
09:53 < dutchie> ie
09:53 < clakre> also calling the bathroom the toilet is metonymy at this point
09:53 < gleki> imm wondering what is the unambigous word here.
09:53 < dutchie> vimku'a is a word also
09:54 < clakre> because the older meaning of toilet from before the vimstizu is no longer used
09:54 < gleki> "toilet/lavatory bowl/pan"?
09:54 < clakre> truly "toilet" just means the thing you sit on to excrete, and calling the room "the toilets" or what have you is a secondary meaning
09:54 < dutchie> i would say "bowl/pan" specifically refers to the smaller part of the toilet
09:54 < gleki> which meaning is no longer use? the {vimku'a} one?
09:54 < dutchie> to me, "water closet" == {vimku'a}
09:54 < dutchie> never stuzi
09:54 < clakre> no, the meaning of toilet which is no longer used is "prepare yourself, brush your hair, look pretty"
09:55 < clakre> that is very old.
09:55 < gleki> en:vimku'a
09:55 < mensi> vimku'a [< vikmi kumfa ≈ Excrete room] = x1=k1 is a loo/water closet/[room with toilet], in which x2=v1 excretes x3=v2,
09:55 < mensi> in home/building/structure x4=k2 surrounded by partitions/walls/ceiling/floor x5=k3 (mass/
09:55 < mensi> jo'u)
09:55 < gleki> again "water closet"
09:55 < clakre> calling a vimku'a a toilet is a euphemism
09:55 < dutchie> originally, maybe, but no longer in my experience
09:55 < clakre> everyone thinks primarily of a vimstizu for "toilet"
09:55 < gleki> .dict lavatory
09:55 < fenki> lavatory — noun: 1. A bathroom; a washroom; a room containing a toilet, 2. A facility for washing hands; a basin — adjective: 1. (dated) Washing, or cleansing by washing
09:55 < ctefaho> mi nitcu lo vimku'a
09:55  * ctefaho runs from tsani
09:56 < gleki> .dict toilet
09:56 < fenki> toilet — noun: 1. (archaic) Personal grooming; washing, dressing etc. [from 17th c.], 2. (now rare) One's style of dressing; dress, outfit. [from 18th c.] — verb: 1. (dated) To dress and groom oneself, 2. To use the toilet, or assist (a child, etc.) in using the toilet
09:56 < gleki> xa'a
09:57  * clakre does not presume to speak for other Englishes though... I don't know what they call what in India
09:57 < ctefaho> sa .I mi Nìtcu lo Toirlèti
09:58  * ctefaho continues running in direction from la tsani
09:58 < dutchie> pe'i the lojban words are clear enough from the constituents
09:58 < clakre> go'i
09:59 < dutchie> everyone knows that a kumfa is a room, and a stizu is a seat (or at least a good dictionary tells you that when you look up vimku'a)
09:59 < gleki> "toalete" means lavatory room in Portuguese. Same for Russian
09:59 < clakre> but you are consulting a lojban->english dictionary
09:59 < dutchie> interesting that so many languages have the same euphemistic metonymy
09:59 < clakre> I was aware of the russian usage, but speaking to the English one
10:00 < gleki> i ja'o zo toirleti na kulnu nutli
10:00 < clakre> pe'i the lojban words are superior to the english and international false friends, which are confusing
10:01 <@xalbo> I'm sort of curious what would be used for a urinal or for a squatting toilet (whatever the term for that is)
10:01 < gleki> oh wait isnt "restroom" unambiguous?
10:01 < ctefaho> hey now that everyone is gathered
10:01 < gleki> although who rests there ...
10:01 < clakre> we would have to survey the world languages about "restroom" zo'o
10:02 < dutchie> gleki: restroom is pretty us-centric
10:02 < ctefaho> How do I pronounce "cupmoi" and "cutnoi" without putting a magic sound in between "pm" and "tn"?
10:02 < gleki> another synonym is "public convenience". now translate that to lojban literally
10:02 < clakre> that could mean anything :)
10:03 < gleki> ctefaho: how do you pronounce "keep me"? as [ki:pmi:],  dont you?
10:03 < gleki> Today Mukti and I disabled many extensions ion mw.lojban.org in an attempt to make it faster.
10:03 < gleki> *on
10:04 < gleki> most likely we'll disable visual Editor too
10:04 < ctefaho> [ʃˈup:moj] ?
10:04 < gleki> ":" denoted long sound in my transcription
10:04 < ctefaho> p is not a vowel
10:04 < gleki> i.e. applicable mostly for vowels
10:04 < gleki> [ʃˈupmoj]
10:04 < gleki> i guess
10:05 < gleki> "tn" as in "Whitney"
10:05 < ctefaho> I can not do that "pm" without putting something magic in between
10:05 < clakre> ctefaho where are you from?  VpmV presents no problem for me, but my syllable-final p's aren't aspirated
10:05 < gleki> ctefaho: even in English?
10:05 < gleki> oh
10:05 < gleki> do svenska
10:05 < ctefaho> I am just assuming you all do [ʃˈupʔmoj]
10:05 < gleki> si sfenska
10:06 < clakre> would you like a recording?
10:06 < clakre> I could pronounce it
10:06 < ctefaho> clakre: I am swedish
10:06 < ctefaho> and I would love to hear you say exactly [ʃˈupmoj]
10:07  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
10:07 < clakre> ok I'll get my headphones and try to find my soundcloud pw
10:07 < ctefaho> or mumble?
10:07 < gleki> i probably need to study phonotactics of Swedish
10:08  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa akti fa
10:09  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa akti fa
10:10  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa akti fa
10:10 < hilmi-can> question on varying the sumti oders with those cmavo words like "se" "te" etc. at first glance there are cmavo up until the 5th sumti place? which gismu or maybe tnaru has the most fixed sumtis?by that i mean for example "tavla" goes asa far as "X4" "in this language"… which gismu/tanru has the "most" sumti places? e.g. "X115"?? Is there a limit? i guess it cant be more than maybe a dozen?
10:11 < ctefaho> en besto
10:11 < ctefaho> hmm how did one do that
10:11 < dutchie> en: besto
10:11 < mensi> besto = x1 dons metaphorical asbestos suit x2 to guard against flames x3 on topic x4 from x5, who disagrees with post x6
10:11 < mensi> for reason x7, not realizing that the post was meant to be sent to x8 rather than all of mailing list x9 (default
10:11 < mensi> jboste) where it was posted in response to email  x10, whose author wishes selma'o  x11 (default SE) were extended to
10:11 < mensi> concisely express place  x12 of brivla  x13 (default besto) which has place structure  x14 and too many places because
10:11 < mensi> of sadistic whim  x15 of brivla-maker  x16, who also created brivla  x17 which has place structure  x18, and so winds up
10:11 < mensi> using too many of cmavo  x19 (default zi'o) in order to make the brivla ( x13) more usable by standard  x20 and wis...
10:11 < mensi> [mo'u se katna] http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/besto
10:11 < ctefaho> ki'e
10:11 < bigcentaur> hilmi-can gismu only have 5, lujvo can have more, but not many do
10:12 < dutchie> too many places is usually avoided because it's too hard to remember
10:12 < bigcentaur> even 5 is pushing it
10:12 < hilmi-can> yeah its reality sense
10:12 < hilmi-can> thx
10:12 < hilmi-can> keep thinking about it
10:12 <@xalbo> Well, there are no official gismu with more than five distinct places (though there are a few with unlimited places, like {jutsi} and {minli})
10:12 < dutchie> can you subscript SE like you can FA actually?
10:13 <@xalbo> And yes, you can subscript SE just like FA.
10:13 < ctefaho> xi to the rescue
10:13 < bigcentaur> so is {se} se_0 or is {se} se_1?
10:13 < ctefaho> can someone join mumble me and clakre got some sound problems?
10:14 < dutchie> ei mi cadzu fi'o kansa lo gerku .i co'o
10:14  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa akti fa
10:14 <@xalbo> I wonder whether that's actually been specified anywhere. My instinct is that {SE xi PA+} swaps the PA+th place with the first, so {se} is the same as {se xi re} (and {te xi re}, for that matter).
10:16  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
10:16  * xalbo adds {fa xi ka'o vo'a xi pai fi xi pai do se xi ka'o na jimpe} to the ideas for obfuscated-lojbo
10:16 < ctefaho> hilmi-can: instead of using place structures you can use case tags/sumytcita instead
10:17 < clakre> I'm uploading it to soundcloud ctefaho
10:17 < ctefaho> or xoi
10:18 < ctefaho> xoi is like noi except it affects the whole bridi (the "verb" and its arguments)
10:18 < ctefaho> clakre: je'e
10:18 < clakre> sorry, is mumble a bot? I did not know what it was
10:18  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa akti fa
10:18 < ctefaho> clakre: uhm
10:18  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa akti fa
10:18 < ctefaho> you aren't Akti?
10:18 < clakre> er, no
10:18  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
10:18 < ctefaho> ...
10:19 < ctefaho> who is akti?
10:19  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
10:19 < hilmi-can> member:ctefaho thanks, i just dont get it yet but ive copied your answer and i am sure i will stumble on that inthe grammar book sooner or later
10:20 < clakre> https://soundcloud.com/clakre/cupmoi-cutnoi
10:20 < ctefaho> clakre: I chatted with someone on mumble I thought was you
10:21 < ctefaho> clakre: ki'e
10:30 < ctefaho> hilmi-can: xoi is most likely not in whatever book you are reading
10:31 < hilmi-can> so is it an additional more recent feature? ive heard of xorlo, which hast been created...
10:32 < gleki> {xoi} and others are new words being naturally added to the language by users and usage
10:34  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: @crushue そういえばそうでした！ロジバンにはヒュムノスから取り入れた意味の語があるんですよー　http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/ra%27i%27au [http://bit.ly/1LSNDze]
10:35 < hilmi-can> member:gleki i read an article by robin powell about setting it free
10:35 < hilmi-can> so is it "set  free" then?
10:35 < gleki> setting what  free? the language?
10:35 < clakre> it is hard to tell from the wikis whether we are still in any sort of baseline period, heh
10:36 < hilmi-can> yes, or do i missunderstand xoi? because from my view if it s a grammatical feature  it would mean yes
10:36 < clakre> there is no overview that I could find of "here's where we are in the process"
10:36 < gleki> it wont be set free as natural languages can do. it can be set free by the continuation of formalizaing existing working tools and adding new tools.
10:36 < gleki> existing working tools are less likely to be diassembled
10:36  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
10:36 < gleki> {xoi} adds new features to the language. but it doesn't change existing things.
10:36 < gleki> so it's in tune with CLL
10:37 < gleki> the reference grammar that you are reading
10:37 < hilmi-can> ahhright
10:37 < hilmi-can> then yes and no. haha thx
10:38 < hilmi-can> sound
10:39 < zipcpi> That baseline thing was kinda a failed experiment; people will use what they want to use. What the formalizers have to do is ever so slowly try to keep up
10:41 < gleki> the freeze period was established in order to make people concentrate on actually learning the language as it is prescribed.
10:42  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
10:42 < ctefaho> who was akti...
10:43 < ctefaho> I think I can guess
10:51  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
11:07 < zipcpi> I was wondering when Curtis will talk about {vujnu}
11:08 < zipcpi> Dunno about the rafsi though. Not sure where it'll be most used
11:10 < dutchie> mi ze'epu na jimpe tu'a zo xoi
11:11 < zipcpi> xu do ca jimpe
11:11 < dutchie> uinai na go'i
11:11 < zipcpi> OK... xoi attaches to the bridi.
11:12 < zipcpi> ke'a is associated with xoi just like it is with poi, but it represents the bridi itself; lo su'u no'a
11:12 < zipcpi> So:
11:12 < zipcpi> le trene cu clani xoi ke'a mitre li pano : The train is ten meters long
11:13 < zipcpi> ke'a represents {lo su'u le trene cu clani}
11:13 < zipcpi> Just like {poi}, if {ke'a} is left out it's assumed to fill the first empty spot
11:14 < dutchie> right, so that makes sense grammatically
11:14 < dutchie> but what is {xoi} actually doing?
11:14 < zipcpi> xoi attaches to the bridi
11:14 < dutchie> just sort of generically "attaching" another birid?
11:14 < dutchie> si bridi
11:14 < zipcpi> It qualifies the current bridi with another bridi
11:15 < dutchie> in any particular way, or just "somehow"?
11:15 < latro`a> perhaps a more specific question may help
11:15 < zipcpi> In the way that wraps the current bridi into an abstraction and makes it the subject of another bridi
11:16 < latro`a> how does the bridi fill ke'a? you certainly don't have {lo su'u le trene cu clani cu mitre li pa no}
11:16 < gleki> isnt {xoi} the same as {noi} in {i [fasnu fa lo nu] broda noi brodi}?
11:16 < zipcpi> latro'a: Why not? I think su'u resolves to {ni} here
11:16 < latro`a> and, once you've figured out what the substitution is, what is the difference between using {xoi} and splitting into two sentences with the substitution?
11:16 < gleki> isnt {xoi} the same as {noi} in {i [fasnu fa lo nu] broda KU noi brodi}?
11:16 < latro`a> zipcpi: that's a type error to me, but my {ni} is weird
11:17 < dutchie> ok, i think i get it now
11:17 < zipcpi> latro'a: I think it makes more sense than mitre3
11:18 < dutchie> it's basically just a way of adding extra information because you can't use {poi} with a selbri, and is more freeform than a tanru
11:18 < latro`a> zipcpi: to me mitre1 are things and mitre2 are numbers
11:18 < latro`a> and you use clatre et al. to specify lengths of axes
11:19 < latro`a> at any rate, I think you'd be better off with an example that doesn't require su'u converting to ni in order to make sense
11:19 < zipcpi> {clatre}? What a weird lujvo - just not extensible to the prefixed ones...
11:20 < latro`a> clatre/gantre/tsutre match up with the old (CLL) jvojva, in the sense that their main structure matches mitre
11:20 < gleki> autorestoring {fasnu fa lo nu} in PEG will require some time
11:20 < gleki> tersmus: broda xoi mo
11:20 < tersmus> Parse error at 6
11:21 < zipcpi> latro'a: Yes, but do we really need an entire slate of these lujvo for ki'otre, miltre, etc?
11:21 < latro`a> if you want you could, but why? just fill the second place
11:21 < zipcpi> The third place, you mean. And I don't know about that; it's not extensible
11:21 < gleki> {ki'otre} is emulating english
11:21 < latro`a> this system doesn't use {lo mitre} almost at all anyway, since {lo mitre} is an object instead of a unit
11:22 < latro`a> no, the second place
11:22 < latro`a> vlaste clatre
11:22 < vlaste> clatre = x1=m1=c1 measures x2=m2 meters in its longest direction x3=m3=c2 by measurement standard x4=m4.
11:22 < latro`a> I coined these words, I know how they work
11:22 < latro`a> :)
11:22 < gleki> i'd use some more generic brivla for length rather than {mitre}
11:22 < latro`a> the point of it was to avoid ever having the length of a thing be a sumti
11:23 < latro`a> because we don't really care about that, it's just a crutch that english uses because it's dependent on nouns
11:23 < latro`a> what we really care about is the relationship between objects and the numerical values of their length, in whatever dimensional system
11:24 < latro`a> what would've been nice would have been a way to get a sumti which represents the dimensional system itself, and then making brivla that take that as an argument
11:24 < gleki> in la bangu i thought that {minli} was the generic any-system-length gismu that we need due to "by standard" place
11:24 < zipcpi> I'm not sure that is the correct approach, because an object can be associated with a unit more than one way
11:24 < zipcpi> Dimension is one of them. Another is "hertz", which is defined as second ^ -1
11:25 < gleki> pi'ai coming in a few seconds
11:25 < zipcpi> Which measures "frequency", but the event that the "frequency" measures could vary
11:26 < zipcpi> And exactly. {pi'ai} only makes all these much more complicated
11:26 < latro`a> pi'ai/te'ai deal with building units without needing to make up words; one of the open problems that I left behind when I set this system down was how to make up reasonable shorthands for commonly used compound units
11:26 < latro`a> e.g. joules, watts, hertz
11:26 < gleki> even {ki'otre} is ugly no matter ow ugly is this in english
11:27 < gleki> *how
11:27 < zipcpi> But even km/h, which aren't combined into a single word but is commonly used
11:27 < latro`a> if your gripe is about the verbosity, that can be dealt with through coinage as needed
11:28 < latro`a> you were expressing a gripe about this system lacking expressiveness
11:28 < gleki> technically there is a perfect solution to "km/h". it's just that we cant agree how to compress it nicely
11:28 < latro`a> I disagree with that, but I don't think a full rant without dialogue is a good way to explain why
11:28 < latro`a> instead I'd rather take examples and explain how to say them in this system
11:28 < latro`a> (frequency is one of the few that I would have trouble with, because that has xorlo problems)
11:29 <@xalbo> "I'm traveling (driving) at 100 km/h"
11:30 < zipcpi> The problem is that mitre3 really sticks out like a sore thumb, and isn't extensible to compound units
11:30 < latro`a> this is just for this specific case of lengths; you don't want it for compound units, which is why these words don't supercede mitre
11:30 <@xalbo> I really like {clatre}; it's a short word for a concept that's sort of awkward to say in English. It feels extremely lojbo to me.
11:31 < zipcpi> Hm
11:32 < latro`a> anyway, the selbri for PA km/h is {pi'ai mitre snidu te'ai li ni'u [pa] be li PA no no no}
11:32 < zipcpi> What about the {vi lo mitre be li re} thing?
11:32 < samcinki> "X is N meters long"?
11:32 < latro`a> that one's easy, X clatre li N
11:32 < gleki> jb: rotsu
11:32 < mensi> rotsu = rotsu — x1(entity)  is thick in length/width etc.  x2(property of x1)
11:32 < mensi> :lo rotsu — thick.
11:32 < mensi> :le dargu cu rotsu lo ka se pagbu ti — The road is thick here.
11:32 < mensi> :Comment: the third largest dimension. ganra, rotsu and clani specify the three dimensions of objects.
11:32 < mensi> :Related words: barda, cinla, ganra, clani, condi, plana, gutci, minli
11:32 < gleki> ok, gantre, tsutre
11:32 < zipcpi> Er I don't think that 1000 m/s = 1 km/h
11:32 < latro`a> sorry
11:33 < latro`a> I meant cacra but defaulted to snidu
11:33 < zipcpi> And I put in fei'u to make it easier to say than te'aini'upa
11:33 < ldlework> Is there any recommended version we should roll out for the next release? We're about to roll out and wondering if we should go for 1.7 or stick with 1.6.
11:33 < ldlework> oops
11:34 < gleki> it's {vi'i lo mitre be pa ki'o mo'e da ze'a lo cacra be mo'e da} + some cmavo to specify average, not possibly infinitesimal speed
11:35 < zipcpi> Maybe we should just change all of them so that all unit selbri have "in dimension x3", even if we might find it difficult to fill for some units
11:35 < zipcpi> So that combinations would behave properly
11:35 < latro`a> that doesn't always make sense; an event snidu a number, and that's it
11:35 < zipcpi> lo ka clatei
11:35 < latro`a> part of the point of doing it with pi'ai/te'ai is that the structure is more or less nonce
11:36 < zipcpi> Hmm
11:36 < latro`a> x1 is whatever thing you are measuring, x2 is a li, and the remaining places are not built into the definition of pi'ai/te'ai
11:36 < latro`a> they might be necessary, but that needs to be settled at the time of lujvo definitino
11:36 < latro`a> *definition
11:37 < zipcpi> The main problem I suppose is that long lujvo are hard on the breath
11:37 < latro`a> sure
11:37 < zipcpi> ki'otrefrinycacra... x.x
11:37 < latro`a> but you can {cei} if need be for now
11:38 < latro`a> until we have zi'evla that everyone actually knows
11:38 < ldlework> small beautiful words with the perfect definition
11:38 < zipcpi> We don't know what to cei it too, that's the problem
11:38 < gleki> {jbocei} i'd say
11:38 < zipcpi> u'i
11:38 < latro`a> again, broda for now
11:38 < latro`a> getting people to agree on short zi'evla for complex concepts will take time and corpus development
11:39 < latro`a> building a general but highly verbose system is much faster
11:39 < zipcpi> It's like I'd even prefer {pi'ai ki'otre fei'u cacra} over {ki'otrefrinycacra}
11:39 < gleki> i guess you will have the most complaint from those used to "/" and "per" in English
11:39 < zipcpi> More syllables, but gives space to catch breath
11:40 < zipcpi> That's why I added fei'u
11:40 < latro`a> the thing is, the english system is very compact for small compounds but completely confined to print for larger compounds
11:40 < latro`a> unless small words are created
11:40 < zipcpi> Mm.
11:40 < latro`a> it's damn near impossible to speak out the units of the gravitational constant
11:41 < gleki> mekso problem detected
11:42 < latro`a> in english, sa'e
11:42 < ldlework> he's saying in engish
11:42 < ldlework> we should make a system that makes everything equally hard to say
11:42 < ldlework> at least it will be consistent
11:42 < ldlework> take the greatest common demoninator and base the convention around that
11:42 < PrincessBecca> speak babm; everything is hard to say in babm
11:43 < latro`a> one quirk of jbo: we have no word for coulomb in the gimste
11:43 < latro`a> it's {pi'ai xampo snidu}
11:43 < PrincessBecca> for example, would you believe "babm" is pronounced "bo-a-bo-mo"
11:43 < latro`a> .u'i
11:43 < PrincessBecca> essentially babm uses the latin alphabet as a syllabary.
11:43 < PrincessBecca> or however you spell that.
11:44 < zipcpi> Sounds like xorban
11:44 < PrincessBecca> dunno xorban
11:44  * ctefaho jst can't get [ː] and [ˑ] out of his jbo-speech
11:44 < ctefaho> any tips?
11:46 < PrincessBecca> i very recently learned to say "o" the international way. basically you say an english "o" without puckering your lips. wish someone would have just told me that.
11:46 < ctefaho> like in sutra I have a hard time getting the u flow to t without any of the above
11:46  * ctefaho uses [ɤ] for o
11:46  * ctefaho and [ɯ] for u
11:46 < latro`a> tr is tricky for americans; we wind up with tcr
11:47 < latro`a> similarly dr becomes djr
11:47 < ctefaho> xmm well I have no troble with the "tra", just the "sut"
11:47 < latro`a> you can enunciate it as su-tra
11:47  * PrincessBecca has no problem with "tr" or "dr"
11:47 < latro`a> if you want
11:47 < ctefaho> [suːt]
11:47 < latro`a> the syllable split doesn't have to be in between
11:47 < ctefaho> well I want the [ː] to burn
11:48 < latro`a> you mean you make a stop sound when you cut off your breath/
11:48 < latro`a> *?
11:48 < ctefaho> we swedes put [ː] in everywhere, trying to learn that out
11:49 < ctefaho> actually I think I got it now
11:49 < ctefaho> [sˈɯtra]
11:49 < zipcpi> dutchie: Anyway for a perhaps less controversial example of xoi: {le vorme co'a ganlo xoi ke'a vlile} -> The door closed violently
11:49 < zipcpi> It's a bit like adverbs, modifying the bridi itself
11:51 < ldlework> which is different than {le vorme co'a vlile ganlo}
11:51 < ldlework> because
11:51 < ldlework> something reasonably probably
11:51 < zipcpi> It's more specific than tanru
11:52 < latro`a> I think the question is, how exactly is {.i le vorme co'a ganlo xoi ke'a vlile} different from {.i le vorme co'a ganlo .i lo su'u go'i cu vlile}
11:52 < ctefaho> latro`a, seems like I was trying to start "t" with a pause for some reason
11:52 < zipcpi> latro'a: That I dunno. Maybe replace i with ije
11:53 < dutchie> zipcpi: je'e ki'e
11:53 < ctefaho> latro`a: well xoi expands to be in the same sentence
11:53 < ldlework> sentences don't have logical consequence
11:53 < latro`a> you could do the same thing with ge gi and a variable binding
11:53 < latro`a> if you object to the sentence separation
11:53 < ctefaho> using go'i I don't think the difference is that big
11:54 < zipcpi> I won't argue that there aren't other ways to do it, I just find it convenient
11:54 < ctefaho> I dunno about "go'i cu vlile" though
11:54 < latro`a> no no, I'm not saying it's bad, I'm trying to get a handle on what it means
11:54 < latro`a> ctefaho, the cu closes the su'u
11:54 < zipcpi> Ah... in that case I think you're correct
11:54 < ctefaho> right
11:54 < ctefaho> I still mess up the terminators all the time
11:55 < ldlework> ctefaho: well consider that if it didn't, latro`a would be saying that xoi resolves to a referring description.
11:55 < ldlework> Since it does, it resolves to a proposition
11:55 < ldlework> Which makes a lot more sense
11:55 < ctefaho> should sit down and learn them properly but too busy fixing stuff no one cares about
11:56 < ctefaho> also in my world xoi does not expand with a "lo"
11:56 < ctefaho> but that's just my crazy world
11:56 < zipcpi> I've also imported another very related solution from RLP's blog, {gi'ei}, but I don't think it can supersede {xoi} right now
11:56 < ldlework> ctefaho: he isn't saying it expands with a lo
11:56 < ldlework> the resulting asset isn't a sumti, its a bridi
11:56 < ctefaho> "lo su'u go'i"
11:56 < ctefaho> but well
11:56 < ldlework> yes, which is an argument to a larger proposition..
11:56 < zipcpi> Might actually be a bit easier for nintadni to understand though. I'm not very sure lol
11:56 < ctefaho> doesn't matter much
11:56 < ldlework> The idea of the previous sentence -is- verb
11:57 < ldlework> the return value isn't "the idea of the previous sentence"
11:57 < latro`a> there's a conflict here between "expansion of {xoi}" and "semantic equivalent which doesn't use {xoi}"
11:58 < latro`a> ldlework is (correctly) saying that xoi does not "expand" in the first sense to an abstractor sumti
11:58 < latro`a> (as I understand)
11:58 < ldlework> yes, it asserts a secondary propoposition
11:58 < ldlework> involving an abstractor sumti
11:58 < ldlework> the abstractor sumti is just a way to refer
11:58 < ldlework> to allow us to say something about the preceeeding sentence
11:58 < latro`a> I was asking whether it can be expressed in a semantically equivalent fashion using an external proposition, which has to absorb the preceding proposition as an argument somehow
11:58 < ldlework> the whole point of xoi
11:59 < ldlework> latro`a: ie
11:59 < ldlework> latro`a: I was combating ctefaho's claim that his expansion doesn't use lo
11:59 < latro`a> and apparently the answer is yes, at least to a good approximation (maybe there is some difference of emphasis or such)
11:59 < ldlework> and I was pointing out that that is kind of missing the point
11:59 < ldlework> latro`a: yeah I think xoi does what you said, I don't think it is a complex semantic
12:00 < latro`a> {lo su'u go'i} is at worst insufficiently specific for the purpose intended
12:00 < ldlework> its pretty generic lol
12:00 < ctefaho> let's just say I think of NU different than you do and is in no mood to defend that viewpoint
12:00 < latro`a> (and I don't think it's that, either)
12:00 < ldlework> ie
12:01 < ctefaho> is/am
12:01 < ldlework> I mean at most, su'u is merely a grammatical transformation
12:01 < latro`a> I think I know what you mean when you object to the use of {lo} there, and I think go'i's "magic" fixes your concern
12:01 < ldlework> I'm not sure there's room for your own interpretation
12:01 < latro`a> namely, up to choice of abstractor type, there's really only one {lo su'u go'i kei ku}
12:01 < latro`a> (note the terminators; I'm explicitly forbidding any sumti from being inserted)
12:02 < latro`a> by contrast there are numerous {lo su'u le vorme co'a ganlo}, but go'i carries referents, not symbols
12:03 < ldlework> I love that observation
12:03 < ldlework> It reflects that idea that the reference acts are performed before the propositional act.
12:04 < ldlework> Does go'i contain the illocutionary force of the sentence from which it came though?
12:04 < ldlework> Or just the proposition?
12:04 < zipcpi> It's kinda why I decided to import {gi'ei}; so that you can add the LE and/or the NU if that semantic is useful
12:04 < ldlework> when I say
12:05 < ldlework> xu do catra
12:05 < ldlework> and you remark on go'i
12:05 < ldlework> are you remarking on my question
12:05 < latro`a> illocutionary force is lost
12:05 < ldlework> or the proposition "do catra" divorced from its interrogative force?
12:05 < ldlework> latro`a: cinri
12:05 < latro`a> the CLL is actually pretty clear on this point, although it doesn't use the phrase "illocutionary force"
12:06 < latro`a> note that this means {.i ma klama lo zarci .i go'i} is grammatical nonsense
12:06 < ldlework> latro`a: the CLL was written by logicians not philosophers if I remember
12:06 < latro`a> ehh...there's a lot there
12:06 < ldlework> And probably when the CLL was first written the modern ideas of language philosophy were being refined at that very time
12:06 < ldlework> late 50's early 60's?
12:06 < latro`a> to my understanding there's background in logic, linguistics, and certain philosophy, but not so much *language* philosophy
12:06 < ldlework> latro`a: je'e
12:07 < latro`a> but quine's ideas are big in the CLL
12:07 < ldlework> does anyone know the date of the cll off hand?
12:07 < latro`a> I wanna say 93 but I think I'm way offf
12:07 < latro`a> *off
12:08 < ldlework> oh
12:08 < latro`a> 97
12:08 < ldlework> oh
12:08 < ldlework> wow
12:08 < ldlework> nevermind?
12:08 < ldlework> :)
12:08 < latro`a> loglan was around the time you're describing
12:08 < ldlework> oh right
12:08 < ldlework> its not like lojban was novel
12:08 < ctefaho> speaking of ancient things can someone explain why "mz" is an illegal cluster?
12:09 < latro`a> I think that might be an american bias
12:09 < ctefaho> the leading theory I have heard so far was that it was done to prevent "James" from lojbanifying well
12:09 < latro`a> because it is easy for {ms} to turn into {mz} and for {mz} to turn into things like {mbz}
12:09 < ctefaho> or that
12:10 < latro`a> at least in american speech
12:10 < latro`a> like, if I said "rhythms" out loud, it would be mz
12:10 < latro`a> not ms
12:10 < ctefaho> just more general american bias then
12:10 < zipcpi> Same for {ns} and {nz} though
12:10 < latro`a> similar, not the same; I'd say it's easier to force that distinction
12:10 < ldlework> zipcpi: have you gotten any further in the book?
12:10 < zipcpi> And {mbz} is banned anyway (but wasn't before, I suppose)
12:11 < zipcpi> ldlework: Nope, didn't buy it yet T.T
12:11 < ldlework> I guess I should stop asking and you'd inform me if it ever happens
12:11 < ldlework> :)
12:12 < ldlework> zipcpi: I'm reading through it again, just finished the chapter on references (3 I think?)
12:12 < ldlework> well not references, but reference, as an act
12:12 < ldlework> ei co'o
12:13 < zipcpi> co'o
12:19 < ldlework> One of the things he does in chapter 2 is make the case that illocutionary acts can be understood in terms of a set of constitutive rules
12:19 < ldlework> And he makes that case by building up the rules that constitute a promise
12:20 < ldlework> One of the most interesting conclusions in my opinion was that by manipulating individual rules of the promise you obtain "defective promises"
12:20 < ldlework> For example, if A promises B to do X, if A doesn't actually intend to X, it becomes a "decietful promise"
12:21 < ldlework> If it is obvious that A will do X anyway irrespective of the promise, then you get a vacuous promise
12:21 < ldlework> if B doesn't want A to do B, you get a threat
12:21 < ldlework> and so on
12:21 < zipcpi> Ah... which is all rolled up into {ai} in Lojban, I believe
12:21 < ldlework> Well, that is lojban's explicit force indicator
12:22 < ldlework> Its possible to invoke illocutionary forces without indicators
12:22 < ldlework> via predicates, or just context
12:22 < ldlework> mi je'a ba za ganzu lo mi kumfa
12:22 < ldlework> can be taken as a promise as long as all the constitutive qualifications for a promise are met
12:23 < ldlework> For example "I promise your family will pay" is a defective promise even though it uses an explictly promise force indicating device
12:24 < ldlework> linguistics and logical calculus are not enough to explain language unfortunately
12:24 < ldlework> though that would certainly make everything easier
12:25 < zipcpi> I hardly use je'a; I think you mean {ja'a}
12:25 < ldlework> I'm just making it unnegatable
12:25 < ldlework> IE "No you wont!"
12:25 < zipcpi> Yeah but {ja'a} fits better there because {je'a} only modifies {ba}
12:25 < ldlework> what
12:26 < zipcpi> {je'a} is in NAhE, not NA
12:26 < ldlework> so I'd need je'a bo?
12:26 < zipcpi> I'm not sure that works
12:26 < ldlework> na'e bo works why not je'a bo
12:26 < zipcpi> What does it attach to?
12:26 < zipcpi> I have no idea how bo works with NAhE
12:26 < ldlework> the sentence?
12:27 < ldlework> Anyway, thanks for the clarification.
12:33 < ldlework> Can anyone lojbanize aristotle for me?
12:35 < zipcpi> la .aristotyl. ?
12:35 < dutchie> what was he called in greek?
12:35  * zipcpi checks
12:35 < zipcpi> la .aristoteles.
12:36 < zipcpi> Aristotélēs
12:36 < ldlework> if I wanted to say "the last broda" would I use moi or mai
12:36 < dutchie> for completeness: Ἀριστοτέλης
12:36 < dutchie> :)
12:37 < ldlework> lo romoi broda ?
12:37 < zipcpi> moi
12:37 < zipcpi> mai is a discursive: "Firstly, secondly, lastly,"
12:37 < ldlework> je'e
12:37 < zipcpi> mai essentially tuns PA into UI
12:38 < ldlework> interpret, da du ma ei zo'u da citka le plise
12:39 < ldlework> "should" as UI is annoying
12:39 < zipcpi> Who should eat the apple? (I think?)
12:39 < ldlework> yeah
12:39 < zipcpi> There is {iancu}
12:39 < ldlework> UI predicates are more annoying
12:40 < ldlework> but whatever I don't have it in me to care about ui predicates I guess
12:40  * ldlework uses iancu
12:43 < zipcpi> Sigh... I have a problem. Work has gotten... disorganized as of late and life has thrown me some curveballs. I might need to refocus my priorities somewhat
12:43 < zipcpi> So I might be here a little less often; we'll see
12:44 < ldlework> da du ma zo'u da citka le plise xoi da iancu
12:44 < ldlework> yikes!
12:44 < zipcpi> I think you mean xoi se iancu
12:44 < zipcpi> But ... hm
12:45 < ldlework> no, the ke'a or whatever variable article is simply x2
12:45 < zipcpi> Oh right, forgot
12:45 < ldlework> It would be nice to have an article that meant something like xoi ri'oi iancu
12:46 < ldlework> that didn't express the speaker's intention, but rather expressed a predicate relationship
12:46 < ldlework> "should" is so overloaded...
12:46 < ldlework> I'm looking for the nibli sense
12:46 < ldlework> He should be here by now.
12:47 < zipcpi> That one I use {kanpe}
12:47 < ldlework> He's not late, but it makes sense for him to already arrived given the known details of his departure and route and so on
12:47 < ldlework> But kanpe is an effect of whatever underlying predicate I'd like to actually get at
12:47 < zipcpi> Then {ba'a} / {la'a}
12:47 < ldlework> Those are also expectations though
12:48 < ldlework> I mean
12:48 < ldlework> Given the details of his departure and route and means and so on, he should have arrived by now.
12:48 < zipcpi> Yes, I "expect" him to have arrived
12:48 < ldlework> My mere expectation does not give rise to the entailment of him being here based on those details
12:48 < ldlework> My expectation is the result of it
12:48 < zipcpi> mi kanpe ko'a ki'u ko'e
12:49 < ldlework> That you reiterate your position in face of clarification my part leads me to believe you just disagree, ok.
12:49 < ldlework> It almost the suggests half of the expects conclusion
12:49 < zipcpi> I'm confused as to what you want
12:50 < ldlework> That he left at ko'a time, and traveled along ko'e using ko'i _suggests_ he should be here now, despite the likely entailment of me expecting the same, as soon as I consider those things which suggest it.
12:50 < zipcpi> So you want something like {nibli}, but a bit weaker?
12:51 < ldlework> Or to be able to use nibli without having to take a piece of paper and write some axioms proving my nibli2
12:51 < ldlework> in other words, being able to give partial stories that lead to nibli2
12:52 < ldlework> IE, as a useful word able to be used in contexts other than one concerning logicians and chalk
12:52 < zipcpi> I think it's best not to touch {nibli} right now; it's important for mathematical statements and such
12:52 < ldlework> Maybe words are useful in one sense and useful in another
12:53 < ldlework> Maybe I really do mean nibli, I'm just not providing predicate arguments that would satify a logician as my interlocutor but totally satisfy the person I'm standing there waiting with
12:54 < zipcpi> I'm not sure what's wrong with kanpe ki'u; do you really need to zi'o out {lo kanpe}?
12:55 < ldlework> Because the focus is on the elements giving rise to the expectation
12:55 < ldlework> Nothing about kanpe provides.
12:55 < zipcpi> Then front the ki'u
12:55 < ldlework> for example
12:56 < ldlework> all those things, the departure, route and so on COULD krinu him being here on time
12:56 < ldlework> but I expect that he be late!
12:56 < ldlework> there are two predicates here
12:56 < ldlework> without nibli we only have a word for one
12:57 < zipcpi> {lakne}? Not sure
13:00 < zipcpi> That makes {nibli} even more problematic, because then it indicates that you are expecting against logical implication, which is probably not desirable. What you want is "forensically suggest"
13:01 < zipcpi> Circumstantial evidence
13:03 < zipcpi> My proposed zi'evla: {indika}
13:13 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/indika
13:15 < zipcpi> Would be a great word for something like Phoenix Wright or Sherlock Holmes, I assume
13:16 < durka42> psh, sherlock holmes doesn't use circumstantial evidence, he just knows
13:16 < zipcpi> u'i
13:18 < ctefaho> are there any words anywhere on jbo-pronounciation and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vowel_length ?
13:19 < ctefaho> all I know is that vowel length isn't supposed to matter
13:19 < ldlework> Why don't we just create gismu?
13:19 < zipcpi> I don't know what it should look like
13:20 < ldlework> Also
13:20 < ldlework> What kind of circumstantial evidence is there if not logical evidence?
13:21 < zipcpi> Circumstantial evidence requires interpretation, and may be contradicted by further evidence
13:21 < ldlework> I wish we could divorce the consititive elements of logical calculus and ike, everything else.
13:21 < ldlework> zipcpi: so can a logical conclusion
13:21 < ldlework> that's what a counter example is
13:21  * durka42 pops up, points to {jinvi} and ducks down behind the counter again
13:21 < ldlework> seriously, the assets or particles of concern that arrive out of the calculus of logical systems and their rules that govern are so totally seaprate from everyhting outside that domain
13:22 < ldlework> its frustrating
13:22 < ldlework> durka42: Everything points to him being here on time, but I expect him to be late.
13:22 < ldlework> How can I constrast my jinvi against the thing that it is constrated against
13:23 < ldlework> What is the propositional content from which my opinion contrasts
13:23 < zipcpi> to'eki'unai
13:23 < durka42> well
13:23 < durka42> it's the jinvi4 isn't it
13:23 < durka42> you expect him to be late based on something
13:23 < durka42> presumably the fact that he's always late
13:23 < ldlework> Yes, but what suggests he should be here on time?
13:23 < durka42> hmm
13:23 < zipcpi> {lo indika}
13:23 < durka42> heh
13:23 < ldlework> How are all the effects that promote his timeliness related, propositionally, to arise the implication from which my opinion contrasts
13:24 < zipcpi> You still haven't given us enough to construct a sentence with
13:24 < ldlework> zipcpi: hehe
13:24 < durka42> yes I got the question
13:24 < durka42> you don't have to ask it again with longer words :)
13:24 < ldlework> I have though, but you can deny it in the "I don't understand anything you say so its your fault" thing
13:24 < ldlework> But I have no tools for that
13:24 < zipcpi> No, you just vaguely point to things that suggest that he's on time
13:24 < ldlework> durka42: for everyone's benefit
13:25 < ldlework> He left from a place close enough, on a train that left on time that travels fast enough, and demonstrated knowledge of the route, and his legs work and so on
13:25 < zipcpi> Thus all I could do right now is {lo indika cu indika}
13:25 < durka42> so a possible rephrase is "[a reasonable person] would expect him to be on time because of X Y Z, but I think he will be late because I know him"
13:26 < ldlework> I think its beyond agentitive consideration
13:26 < ldlework> Think of it as a simulation
13:26 < ldlework> With constraints that suggest an outcome
13:26 < ldlework> it doesn't matter if there's no life in the universe
13:26 < ldlework> given an incomplete description, the description promotes one outcome over another
13:27 < durka42> if all evidence suggests a tree fell in the forest, but nobody saw the evidence, did it make a sound?
13:27 < ldlework> <3
13:27 < ldlework> I think not!
13:27 < durka42> well so then there is an agent, isn't there?
13:27 < ldlework> I was making fun of the idea that there has to be
13:27 < zipcpi> lo nu la .djon. cu jibni cu indika lo du'u la .djon. ca darca .iku'i ki'u lo nu la .djon. cu jai cafne fai lo ka lerci kei mi jinvi lo na se go'i
13:27 < ldlework> I was playing god, using that conclusion
13:28 < ldlework> preventing the sound whimsically
13:28 < ldlework> zipcpi: I think making nibli only usable in contexts where logical caluclus is taking place is like saying anytime you use a referring description you reduce the universe to only one thing existing and things liek that
13:28 < ldlework> I think its the same conflation
13:29 < zipcpi> Ugh... I'm not gonna be roped to that argument again
13:29 < durka42> I also want to reach for {nibli} but maybe you guys have already discussed that
13:29 < durka42> but it's too definitive
13:29 < ldlework> And I think that, zipcpi, you would stamp your approval on lines of nibli1 for which a counter-example could be shown that you didn't expect
13:29 < ldlework> and then you'd be like, well nibli1 was incomplete!
13:29 < ldlework> and that's all I'm asking you allow me to do
13:30 < ldlework> in all the contexts where the entire picture doesn't arrive from a set of axioms
13:30 < ldlework> but context
13:30 < ldlework> like we're here waiting for a guy
13:30 < ldlework> nothing explains his tardiness
13:30 < ldlework> (even though, objectively something does - IE the missing clause from nibli1)
13:30 < durka42> "logic entails that he will arrive in 2 minutes, but I expect that he won't"
13:30 < durka42> but that's different from the original sentence isn't it
13:31 < ldlework> "all the consequences of the details of this travel that I have observed all cooperate to" entail him arriving in 2 minutes, but I expect that he wont
13:31 < ldlework> What ties all of those aspects of his travel together if not rational implication, IE logic
13:32 < zipcpi> ro lo se zgana be mi
13:32 < ldlework> Do we have to sit down and prove the truth-value of whether he will indeed arrive in 2 minutes to state as such?
13:32 < zipcpi> cu indika
13:32 < ldlework> If only emphatically?
13:33 < zipcpi> The point is we are talking about circumstantial evidence now
13:33 < ldlework> Take the counter example.
13:33 < ldlework> We take a few axioms
13:33 < ldlework> I ask, does this nibli the nibli2
13:33 < ldlework> you rub your chin and declare yes!
13:33 < ldlework> and I then I say, ah but what about this counter example
13:33 < ldlework> you go drats! the nibli1 must be incomplete
13:33 < zipcpi> circumstantial evidence is different from an axiomatic system
13:33 < ldlework> But suppling this extra clause we make room for the counter example and the nibli-ness is restored
13:34 < ldlework> zipcpi: no, circumstantial just means there isn't enough to entail the conclusion directly
13:34 < ldlework> because there is missing information
13:34 < zipcpi> Exactly, because you still expected him to be late
13:34 < zipcpi> What is left unimplied
13:34 < ldlework> The same kind of missing modeling that lead you to believe the unaltered nibli1 entailed the nibli2
13:34 < zipcpi> Is that the pattern of him being late
13:34 < ldlework> which doesn't matter
13:34 < zipcpi> Is to you a stronger {indika} than everything else
13:34 < ldlework> Because things that we leave out of nibli1 should all be treated equally
13:34 < ldlework> nibli doesn't care that you're talking about people's habits
13:35 < ldlework> why should it, it is a predicate
13:35 < ldlework> What you're saying is that
13:35 < ldlework> Noone should ever utter nibli statements until they have exhaustively explored all possible variants of the nibli1 to objetively prove that the following nibli2 is entailed
13:35 < ldlework> this isn't possible
13:35 < ldlework> academically or otherwise
13:36 < ldlework> I'm saying, let me make the same nibli conclusions, wihtout all the inofrmation
13:36 <@xalbo> The point is that {nibli} only works in very limited formal structures, where you actually *can* prove that all primes greater than 2 are odd.
13:36 < ldlework> let me make the same mistake or characterizations of _GIVEN_ nibli1's
13:36 < ldlework> that logicans do
13:36 < ldlework> xalbo: except the cases where you find a counter example
13:36 < ldlework> then the nibli1 is defective
13:37 < ldlework> let me make conclusions given the same statements with defective models
13:37 <@xalbo> You can do that, but that's completely unrelated to {nibli}.
13:37 < ldlework> the assumption is always that we're considering enough nibli1 to entail the nibli2
13:37 < ldlework> xalbo: please
13:37 < ldlework> use the example I gave or tell me why it is false
13:37 < ldlework> I show you a nibli1 a set of axioms and arguments
13:37 < ldlework> and I claim that it entails nibli2
13:38 < ldlework> I give you 6 months and you cannot prove that the nibli1 doesn't entail the nibli2
13:38 < zipcpi> Then the first logician has just made a mistake. However, the statement "ko'a indika ko'e" is not false because "ko'i indika lo du'u na me'au ko'e"
13:38 < ldlework> Yes precisely!
13:38 < ldlework> the logican made the conclusion of nibli1 given a constrained an incomplete nibil2
13:38 <@xalbo> "I give you 6 months and you cannot prove that the nibli1 doesn't entail the nibli2" -- that's not how logical entailment works.
13:38 < zipcpi> No, he made a mistake
13:38 < ldlework> omg
13:38 < zipcpi> He made a statement that was false
13:38 < ldlework> xalbo: not until we know it is false!
13:38 < ldlework> IE a counter example is shown
13:38 <@xalbo> You don't fail to prove that it doesn't entail...and therefore conclude it does. Or at least, you don't call that logical entailment.
13:39 < ldlework> Actually you do
13:39 < ldlework> We conclud things logically entailed as long as no counter example to the nibli1 or model, is shown
13:40 < ldlework> If I was to produce a counter example to the models we have 'proven' then we get to retroactively go back and say all the things we've been saying are logically entailed, are not
13:40 <@xalbo> I don't remember "Proof by giving up before we found a counterexample" in any of my classes.
13:40 < ldlework> the nibli1 was an incomplete model
13:40 < ldlework> xalbo: say the same thing you're trying to insinuate
13:40 < ldlework> with a direct assertion
13:40 < ldlework> rather than an implication
13:40 < ldlework> and we'll see if it sounds ridiculous or makes a lot of sense
13:40 < ldlework> I think your implication is hiding the ridiculousness of your actual conclusion
13:40 < ldlework> so say it frankly
13:41 <@xalbo> I directly assert that {nibli} isn't what you're looking for. It is a statement about how we manipulate symbols in formal systems. It's not useful for talking about whether someone will show up for dinner or not.
13:41 < ldlework> No
13:41 < ldlework> Please actually say what you mean above
13:41 < ldlework> About logical entailment
13:41 < ldlework> That if we prove something logically entails
13:41 < ldlework> and are satisfied
13:41 < ldlework> for say 1000 years
13:41 < ldlework> have we not been saying "that is logically entailed"
13:41 < ldlework> for a thousand years
13:41 < ldlework> until someone produces a counter example?
13:41 < ldlework> Surely, everyone was wrong
13:41 < ldlework> But they still concluded it was nibli
13:42 < ldlework> So there is an effect of incomplete models
13:42 < ldlework> at play, in all considerations of whether something is nibli or not
13:42 < dutchie> if someone pulls out a counterexample, it wasn't proved properly in the first place
13:42 < ldlework> dutchie: exactly
13:42 < ldlework> So when I say
13:42  * dutchie wades in without having fully read scrollback
13:42 < ldlework> anything nibli anything
13:42 < ldlework> I'm doing just as good of a job
13:42 < ldlework> as logicians saying nibli anything nibli
13:42 < ldlework> Because we both are saying things that are potentially NOT entailed
13:43 < ldlework> So when I say a bunch of stuff that you say "no that's just jinvi"
13:43 < dutchie> i would say that "x=2" nibli "x^2 = 4"
13:43 < ldlework> No I'm saying, this partial model impies, or entails the conclusion I'm providing
13:43 < dutchie> which is certainly a logician/mathematician's statement
13:43 < ldlework> well that can't be true
13:43 < ldlework> x=2 doesn't _entail_ anything
13:44 < ldlework> You may say, I disagree that it is nibli, because what if "z which you haven't considered in your model is true? then your entailment is false."
13:45 < ldlework> I'm saying the same goes for logicans but we don't stop them at every turn to point out there might be missing parts of their model
13:45 < ldlework> We merely use the predicate to understand that the logician believes there is entailment
13:45 < ldlework> And we then investigate the model and conclusion to see whether we agree
13:45 < zipcpi> axiomatic systems != modeling
13:45 < ldlework> I'm pleading to let me make these same mistakes as a speaker and same demands of my interlocutor for _arbitrary sets of incomplete models_
13:45 < ldlework> zipcpi: that's exactly what modeling means
13:46 < ldlework> a model is a set of axioms
13:46 < dutchie> um
13:46 < dutchie> not in model theory it isn't
13:46 < dutchie> but that's probably not relevant
13:46 < dutchie> actually it might be
13:47 < ldlework> co'o for a while
13:48 < dutchie> i agree, however, that insisting on total proof for {nibli} is likely to make the word useless outside of formal logic
13:48 < ldlework> and as I've just proven, useless there too
13:49 < zipcpi> I dunno, someone fire up the gismu co'e for indika, and maybe we should make BAI for it too
13:49 < ldlework> I think my point is hidden in my question to durka
13:50 < ldlework> If not logic, what are the things that relate the details of one's departure that leads others to make conclusions about them
13:50 < zipcpi> Circumstantial / forensic evidence.
13:50 < ldlework> I'm still using logical entailment to arrive at my purported nibili2
13:50 < zipcpi> The English word "logic" is overloaded
13:50 < ldlework> just using a very incomplete model
13:50 < ldlework> for which many counter-examples may be produced
13:51 < ldlework> but likely, my listener will make an immediate consideration of whether they agree with my conclusion based on the incomplete model
13:51 < ldlework> we will both go on, having concluded one way or another, given the incomplete model
13:51 < ldlework> resulting in either a "Yeah what the hell we're going to be late!"
13:51 < ldlework> or "Nah, I heard there was maintenence on his tram line"
13:52 < ldlework> All we're trying to do with nibli is say that the conclusion is rationally derrived from the givens
13:52 < ldlework> as opposed to say, whimsy, preference, malace, goodwill or anything else
13:52 < ldlework> without having to say
13:52 < ldlework> here's my givens, here's my conclusion, my conclusion is racli, y'know!
13:53 < ldlework> as three different steps, or even 2
13:53 < ldlework> since saying "something concludes from something else" is a pretty fundamental assertion
13:54 < ldlework> zipcpi: I believe the only difference between nibli and your thing, is whether the model is incomplete and whether the truth-value of the conclusion can be proven without a doubt by peers far removed from context given purely only the model set forth in nibli1
13:54 < ldlework> I argue that classifying certain models as complete and universally nibli is very ivory tower, and makes a useless predicate from the word
13:57 <@xalbo> Formal systems exist, though, in which absolutely proof actually is possible. And since Lojban was sort of built around FOPL, having a predicate that specifically and precisely encapsulates one of the fundamental operations of those systems doesn't seem that horrible.
13:57 < ldlework> Except that its not
13:57 < ldlework> We just covered the case of counter examples
13:57 <@xalbo> No, you just asserted that there are counter examples. O
13:58 < ldlework> counter examples exist and until you show me a history of logic where counter examples are always shown right as part of the provisioning of logical systems
13:58 <@xalbo> I'm saying that there can be no such thing. Period.
13:58 < ldlework> right, so you place certain systems you personally like into an ivory tower, great
13:59 < ldlework> Disregard that logic is shattered into a million different types to account for the counter-examples and paradoxes that arise in each one
13:59 <@xalbo> Show me a proof that was held to be true in an axiomatic system for any length of time before a counterexample was discovered.
13:59 < ldlework> No counter-examples! is exclaimed, an all systems of logic were immediately unified.
13:59 < ldlework> And then on the second day...
14:00 < ldlework> xalbo: point to me at system for which no counter example or no derrivative formalization was required
14:00 < ldlework> Since you challenge me to provide even 1, I'm sure you have the benefit of reaching into the limitless bounty of self-consistent useful systems of logic for which no problems were ever discovered.
14:01 < dutchie> well gödel kind of ruined our fun as far as that goes
14:01 < ldlework> And then prove to me no counter-examples exist for that system
14:01  * ldlework snickers.
14:01 < ldlework> dutchie: hehe
14:02 < dutchie> but still, if you believe e.g. peano arithmetic is inconsistent, then we have bigger fish to fry
14:02 < ldlework> I'm not going to make claims about specific systems.
14:02 < zipcpi> Darn that Godel lol... still though, it's not as if someone could provide a "counterexample" to the prime thing. There can be different axiomatic systems, like Euclidean vs non-Euclidean geometry, but nothing in one system "disproves" the other
14:03 <@xalbo> dutchie: Who knows if it's consistent? Maybe we'll find a counter example tomorrow!
14:03 < ldlework> I'm just saying, that there's nothing inherent about a system that makes it universally consistent forever, as systems we've made that conclusion about, have shown not to have that property.
14:03 < dutchie> no
14:03 < ldlework> lol
14:04 < dutchie> but i'm sure i do remember that certain weaker systems of arithmetic can (using external methods) to be consistent (i.e. no counterexamples)
14:04 < dutchie> "This means it is possible to algorithmically determine, for any sentence in the language of Presburger arithmetic, whether that sentence is provable from the axioms of Presburger arithmetic"
14:04 < ldlework> Also the x3 allows for the same arguments considered under different rules.
14:05 < dutchie> although it's definitely in "ivory tower" land
14:05 < ldlework> So maybe my x3 is "given the incomplete intuitional rationality that drives us in any context besides those formally defined outside of cultural intuition"
14:05 <@xalbo> Creating a consistent axiomatic system is really, really easy. What's hard is to create a consistent axiomatic system that models reality.
14:05 < ldlework> so there
14:06 < dutchie> xalbo: indeed. people often forget the qualification of GFIT that it applies to systems *in which you can model arithmetic*
14:07 <@xalbo> dutchie: Well, that and the fact that it doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of true statements that *can* be proved in the system.
14:08 < dutchie> xalbo: yes, but that's irrelevant to the current "you can't prove there aren't counterexamples" discussion
14:08 < ldlework> I'll just use fi zo'e from now on
14:08 < dutchie> ldlework: lol
14:08 <@xalbo> It's just that the system can't prove all true statements. That doesn't mean it *can* prove statements that *aren't* true.
14:08 < ldlework> xalbo: but you go further
14:09 < ldlework> I mean, given a specific logical system I actually agree with your extremism with related to entailment
14:09 < ldlework> I don't fundamentally agree
14:09 < ldlework> disagree*
14:09 <@xalbo> I assert that a system that is not consistent is not a valid nibli3. I further assert that your "given the incomplete intuitional rationality that drives us in any context besides those formally defined outside of cultural intuition" is not a consistent axiomatic system.
14:09 < ldlework> The givens must actually give rise to the conclusion
14:10 < ldlework> But its not really a question of whether the logical system is complete
14:10 < ldlework> Its whether the nibli1 is complete enough to entail the nibli2 under a given logical system
14:10 < ldlework> Also the predicate doesn't say anything about consistent axiomatic system, it just says rules for logic
14:11 < ldlework> Your disagreement is that, saying, his train left on time and that its close enough to the destination isn't enough facts or givens to actaully conclude they should or will arrive on time
14:11 < ldlework> your problem isn't with what logical system is used, its that those givens don't actually entail
14:11 < ldlework> right?
14:12 <@xalbo> My problem is that I consider it a huge type error.
14:12 < ldlework> Another thing is
14:12 < ldlework> where's the type error
14:13 < Amnadya> May i see the sentence under discussion?
14:13 < dutchie> i'm not sure there is one
14:13 < ldlework> Amnadya: its about whether you can use nibli if you have an incomplete nibli1
14:14 < ldlework> IE a nibli that doesn't fully entail nibli2
14:14 < ldlework> IE, say the nibli1 provides a bunch of facts, but you could add one more that would make the nibli2 false, or true, depending on the nature of the missing given
14:14 < ldlework> IE, the given nibli1 isn't enough to fully consumate an entailing conclusion
14:15 < zipcpi> But axiomatic systems don't work that way. You don't prove "all primes greater than 2 are odd" by adding one more fact or one more circumstantial evidence
14:15 <@xalbo> I think we're defining "entail" to mean drastically different things.
14:15 < zipcpi> Formal logic is not a Phoenix Wright courtroom; there are no "turnabouts"
14:15 < ldlework> x is a man => x is mortal
14:16 < ldlework> x is mortal can be true or not true, the givens don't fully consumate the entailment of the conclusion
14:16 < ldlework> But by adding in
14:16 < ldlework> all men are mortal
14:16 < ldlework> or
14:16 < ldlework> all men are immortal
14:16 < ldlework> we fully consumate the truth value of the conclusion
14:16 < ldlework> and decide whether the things on the left fully entail the conclusion on the right
14:17 < zipcpi> *you don't disprove, sorry
14:17 < dutchie> i wouldn't say that is really an aspect of nibli1 but of the full "entailment in some system" predicate
14:17 < ldlework> what?
14:18 <@xalbo> dutchie: I claim that {nibli} *is* the full "entailment in some system" predicate.
14:18 < dutchie> xalbo: and i agree
14:18 <@xalbo> je'e
14:18 < Ilmen> {loduu co'e gi'e remna fa ko'a cu nibli loduu ko'a mroka'e}
14:18 < Amnadya> coi la ilmen
14:18 < ldlework> I agree as well
14:19 < dutchie> well, nibli1 in itself can't be fully "complete" or "incomplete"
14:19 < dutchie> it depends on your nibli3
14:19 < dutchie> well, this is where formal logic gets a bit hairy wrt godel
14:19 < dutchie> and the complicated interaction between consistency and completeness
14:19 < ldlework> Okay I guess I'll conclude iwth this question
14:20 < ldlework> Is there value, or enough value to disrupt otherwise cromulent discussions, conversations or any discourse, to stop all interlocutors to discuss whether nibli is justified in unformal discourse given that the speaker didn't provide nibli3
14:20 <@xalbo> nibli1 can be sufficient to prove the nibli2 (for instance, "human(x) ∧ ∀x: human(x) → mortal(x)", or it can be insufficient for that purpose (e.g., just "human(x)")
14:20 < ldlework> xalbo: right
14:21 < dutchie> perhaps what we disagree on is what nibli3 should mean in informal discourse when unspecified
14:22 < dutchie> the obvious choice of "normal human intuition/experience" doesn't fit in well with formal logic
14:22 < ldlework> but we are never using lojban for formal logic
14:22 < ldlework> by never I mean, I have yet to see it on accident where Iw asn't looking for examples
14:23 < dutchie> but that's what we agreed nibli is for? at least that's what i'm interpreting it as
14:23 < ldlework> So
14:23 < dutchie> well, not necessarily formal formal logic, but certainly a strong implication
14:23 < ldlework> the argument places of a predicate are predetermined
14:23 < Ilmen> I wonder about the differences between {nibli} and {banzu}.
14:24 < ldlework> dutchie: anyone saying nibli in the way I'd like to use it, is trying to emphazise the rationality of the purported conclusion
14:24 < ldlework> IE, its not formal formal logic, but they are invoking its name for a reason
14:24 < dutchie> right
14:24 < ldlework> I do like the distinction between sufficient and nessesary conditions
14:24 < ldlework> Like what banzu provides
14:24 < dutchie> in that case, then they must at least subconsciously have some system in their mind
14:25 < ldlework> that he left on time, and the station is close enough, is sufficent for him being here on time
14:25 < ldlework> dutchie: there's also {ko'a je zo'e je zo'e nibli} where ko'a is the only substantive reason I've given :)
14:26 < Ilmen> ko cliva lo mi vacri doi ka glare dukse
14:26 < dutchie> my impression of {banzu} is that it's material sufficiency; you {banzu} enough food to avoid starving
14:26 < ldlework> it should be as general as possible
14:26 < ldlework> so you should interpret it as the most general form of sufficiency as you're able
14:27 < ldlework> its the compliment of nitcu
14:27 < dutchie> ok agreed
14:27 < Ilmen> je isn't appropriate here; {joi} would be preferable
14:27 < Ilmen> pe'i
14:27 < ldlework> oh because je multiplies the proposition?
14:27 < ldlework> je'e
14:27 < ldlework> ki'e
14:27 < dutchie> possibly je is appropriate? but they certainly have a different meaning
14:28 < dutchie> if the implications are true separately, then je works; if not then joi
14:28 < ldlework> dutchie: I think he means ko'a je ko'e nibli really means
14:28 < ldlework> ko'a nibli AND ko'e nibli
14:28 < Ilmen> .e/je blindly create two different bridis
14:28 < ldlework> which is probably false
14:28 < dutchie> indeed
14:28 < dutchie> just checking, i'm still only new to lojban
14:29 < dutchie> but anyway, {ko'a joi zo'e joi zo'e} is the speaker not providing enough information, not nibli being wrong
14:30 < zipcpi> Example sentence: lo nu le degypri cu mapti cu indika lo du'u la .tom. cu catra
14:30 < Ilmen> He leaves information to context, probably because it's sufficiently clear not to bother superfluously adding it explicitly
14:32 < zipcpi> le nu le degypri cu mapti cu indika lo du'u la .tom. cu catra :: The fact that the fingerprints match implies that Tom is the killer.
14:33 < dutchie> nu or du'u for indika1?
14:35 < ldlework> nu implie du'u
14:35 < ldlework> so I'd say du'u
14:35 < durka42> is {indika} just {ve jinvi fo zi'o}?
14:36 < ldlework> durka42: he should be here on time, but I expect he'll be late
14:36 < Amnadya> Yeah, implies to whom?
14:36 < durka42> is that supposed to be an answer to my question?
14:36 < zipcpi> durka42: Not sure. There is a possibility of tying it to Bayesian evidence
14:36 < ldlework> durka42: its to distinguish opinion from weak entailment
14:36 < ldlework> I don't believe he will be here
14:37 < ldlework> But all facts point to him being here
14:37 < durka42> zipcpi: mm. like, x2 is more likely to be true given that x1 is true
14:37 < ldlework> You know, except the ones that would _entail_ him being here.
14:37 <@xalbo> durka42: Not completely. You rarely jinvi both x and ¬x, but it's not uncommon for there to be evidence toward both.
14:37 < durka42> true
14:37 < ldlework> Also, banzu seems to give a "he could be here on time" and we're looking for something else
14:38 < durka42> but the negative evidence would convince someone who didn't see the positive evidence
14:38 < durka42> and vice versa
14:38 < zipcpi> Yes, think Phoenix Wright and the constant turnabouts :p
14:38 < ldlework> We need a predicate that x1 allows for x2 to be true but might be false
14:38 < durka42> zipcpi: I dunno what that is
14:38 < ldlework> (only beause it doesn't entails)
14:39 < zipcpi> durka42: Courtroom drama game
14:39 < Amnadya> "na natfe"
14:39 < ldlework> also what happens when nibli2 is statistical in nature?
14:39 <@xalbo> Amnadya: Yes, that's it exactly.
14:40 < ldlework> again that's just "he could be here on time"
14:40 < ldlework> "circumstances allow for his prudence"
14:40 < ldlework> perhaps that's what english speakers mean by "should" ?
14:41 <@xalbo> That's among the 50 ba'u things they mean by "should".
14:41 < ldlework> right, but in the context of what we've been talking about
14:41 < ldlework> I'm thinking more like, "all externalizing factors X encourage or promote the outcome Y"
14:41 < ldlework> IE they do more than allow for it
14:41 < dutchie> {kanpe fi so'e}?
14:42 < ldlework> The road was wet, they were going to fast, the brakes were broken, and they were on their phone."
14:42 < dutchie> er, {piso'e} i think
14:42 < ldlework> None of this -entails- that they crash
14:42 < ldlework> But it doesn't merely allow for it either
14:42 < ldlework> And I feel like all of this would be true
14:42 < ldlework> If the only person alive in the universe was the person who crashed
14:43 < ldlework> those factors still did more than allow for the crash
14:43 < ldlework> even though no one opines or expects any given outcome
14:43 < Amnadya> laknyzenriha,
14:44 <@xalbo> What I've wanted for a while, and {indika} sounds pretty close, is "p(x2|x1) > p(x2|¬x1)". That is, knowing x1 we believe x2 to be more likely than we would have believed it to be not knowing x1. x1 is evidence in favor of x2.
14:44 < ldlework> We're going to far to blame any given effect for the true causation though
14:44 < ldlework> unless the only causation you mean by rinka is the lakne zenba
14:45 < ldlework> But how can something be evidence of something that hasn't happened?
14:46 < ldlework> nibmli :)
14:46 < zipcpi> ko'a can be statistical/circumstantial evidence for ko'e, but ko'e might still not be true
14:46 < ldlework> I meant the other way around
14:46 < ldlework> How do we think about entailment when the outcome is statistical
14:46 < ldlework> IE, X entails Y might happen
14:47 < ldlework> When we don't even purport to show that X entails Y _will_ happen
14:47 < Amnadya> cumnihi
14:47 < dutchie> i don't think nibli is appropriate for that
14:47 < ldlework> dutchie: its not possible to entailment the conditions for possibility?
14:48 < ldlework> to entail*
14:48 < ldlework> in this case we only care to entail that the state of things that supports some outcome is true
14:48 < ldlework> I don't see why that doesn't fall under the same purview
14:49 < dutchie> you could entain the possibility, but not the possible event
14:49 < ldlework> That seems to create a distinction where one isn't demanded
14:49 < dutchie> well, it depends on how strict you want your semantics for nibli to be i suppose
14:50 < ldlework> Mmm I think "proving the circumstances that make some event possible, true"
14:50 < Amnadya> ithkuil: ilmen
14:50 < ithkuil> ilmen: P1S1/DYN-lm-ABS-UNI/COA/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
14:50 < ldlework> is the same as saying
14:50 < ldlework> "proving that some event is possible"
14:50 < ldlework> is the same semantic data
14:50 < dutchie> yes
14:50 < zipcpi> Amandya: lol what does it mean?
14:50 < Ilmen> .a'u
14:50 < dutchie> but it's different to "proving that some event happens/will happen"
14:50 < ldlework> Right but that's what I mean by statistical
14:50 < Amnadya> something about music
14:50 < ldlework> In that truth-value becomes meaningless
14:50 < Ilmen> .u'e
14:50 < durka42> ithkuil: durka
14:50 < ithkuil> durka: P1S1/STA-d-IND-AGG/ASO/U/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
14:51 < zipcpi> -lm- "music"
14:51 < ldlework> you don't say either or, you can only entail likelyhood or mere potential
14:51 < ctefaho> how about a word for "x may or may not be the case"
14:51 < ctefaho> and make it a UI
14:51 < durka42> that's cumki
14:51 < ldlework> I mean, isn't this the very problem that fuzzy logic addresses?
14:51 < ldlework> Where the conclusions are not binary
14:51 < dutchie> or an abstractor? "x1 is the possibility of [bridi] with probability x2" or something
14:51 < ctefaho> cumki is too specific
14:51 < dutchie> i have no idea if that's useful though
14:51 < ctefaho> we need something vaguer
14:52 < ctefaho> +zo'o
14:52 < zipcpi> zilkanpe?
14:52 < ldlework> I like the idea of 'crippled entailment'
14:52 <@xalbo> cu'o?
14:52 < zipcpi> ua zo cu'o
14:52  * durka42 can't think of anything less specific than cumki :)
14:53 < ldlework> durka42: lakne
14:53 < ldlework> oh that's more specific
14:53  * ldlework burps.
14:53 < zipcpi> And {zilpa'a} is already defined
14:53 < ldlework> "defective entailment"
14:54 <@xalbo> faurjavnarfau: x1 either happens or it doesn't.
14:54 < zipcpi> latyjavnarmlatu
14:54 < ctefaho> durka42: cumki cai
14:54 <@xalbo> .u'i
14:54 < ldlework> IE, nothing is entailed, but everything involved could potentially be involved in such an entailment
14:54 < ldlework> IE
14:54 < ldlework> Nothing provided contradicts, and works towards entailment but is insufficent for real entailment
14:55 <@xalbo> latyjvenarmlatu
14:55 < ldlework> IE, its not counter-evidence, and its not irrelevant evidence
14:55 < durka42> na'e natfe?
14:55 < ldlework> And evidence, for whatever word means evidence for things that haven't happened yet
14:56 < ldlework> like the role gravity plays in support beams breaking
14:56 < ldlework> IE, gravity doesn't break beams
14:56 < ldlework> but it pulls other things down
14:56 < ldlework> the weight of those things might create force enough to break the beam
14:56 < ldlework> IE mere gravity doesn't entail the support beam breaking
14:57 < ldlework> Neither does the weight of what is supported
14:57 < ldlework> Neither does the crack in the beam
14:57 < ldlework> But leaving out gravity "the crack" + "the weight" something something the support breaking
14:57 < ldlework> Anything that allows us to demonstrate our rational intuitions of causation
14:57 < ldlework> For realized and unrealized events
14:57 < ldlework> Or truths
14:58 < ldlework> IE I didn't state everything that entails the breaking of the support beam
14:58 < ldlework> I can't prove that it will break, but I want to convey that it logically follows, and that you should agree with me not becaue I'm popular and have opinions people follow
14:58 < dutchie> does {rinka} fit there?
14:58 < ldlework> But because you can use the same rationalization to come to the same conclusion
14:59 < ldlework> dutchie: go back to the guy who should be here on time because everything has gone in their favor
14:59 < ldlework> But opined not to show up on time (for whatever reason)
15:00 < durka42> I'm slowly being convinced that {indika} is necessary and that it means P(x2 | x1 is true) > P(x2 | x1 is unknown)
15:00 < ldlework> I'm trying to discover the universal consitutive semantic contained within english "should", in this context
15:01 < dutchie> i think i agree with durka42
15:01 < durka42> so it will be defined in terms of {zilkanpe} I guess
15:02 < durka42> actually {nilyla'e} is better than {zilkanpe} because y'all are afraid to use {zi'o}
15:02 < zipcpi> u'i
15:02 < ldlework> I still think its closer to banzu
15:03 < ldlework> There's no consideration or valuation
15:03 < ldlework> its not a matter of expectation, rather than an observation of the rationalaity of things
15:03 < durka42> hmm
15:03 < durka42> example sentence with banzu?
15:03 < ldlework> IE, how the simulation or system ought to behave based on its observed characteristics
15:03 < durka42> banzu2 is supposed to be a "purpose"
15:04 < ldlework> There's too much hand-wavy "meaning" as in personally-identifying meaning being injected here :D
15:04 < ldlework> even with "purpose"
15:04 < durka42> I am just wondering what form the banzu2 would take
15:04 < ldlework> Does the law assume entailment?
15:04 < ldlework> Like nibli assumes entailment?
15:04 < durka42> which law?
15:05 < ldlework> mortal law
15:05 < ldlework> What is the verb that characterizes that which Sherlock Holmes does the most.
15:05 < ldlework> Beyond expectation
15:05 < ldlework> Does Holmes conclude based on "logical entailment"
15:05 < durka42> evidence
15:05 < durka42> what's mortal law? what are you asking, lol
15:05 < dutchie> deduction?
15:06 < ldlework> In that, the facts imply the conclusion
15:06  * durka42 still wonders how banzu can fit into this
15:06 < ldlework> dutchie: okay so what characteristic of a bunch of isolate facts, allow us to use them collectively to deduce conclusions
15:06 < dutchie> en:didni
15:06 < mensi> didni = x1 deduces/reasons by deduction/establishes by deduction that x2 is true about x3 from general rule
15:06 < mensi> x4
15:06 < ldlework> IE, what is the ka broda
15:06 < ldlework> of the facts themselves
15:06 < ldlework> that allows one to deduce some conclusion that would hold up in any court
15:06 < ldlework> rather than being an expectation, valuation, or otherwise
15:07 < durka42> actually what sherlock does is induction, but yeah
15:07 < ldlework> IE, the facts entail the conclusion to everyone's satisfaction
15:07 < ldlework> but not entail in the way we've covered
15:07 < dutchie> durka42: i am aware, but everyone (including holmes/conan doyle) calls it deduction
15:07 < ldlework> "I deduced that you"
15:07 < ldlework> ie
15:08 < ldlework> I think that I have finally found a way of enunciating my question that seems satisfactory to myself, I'm not sure I care what the eventual answer is
15:08 < dutchie> haha
15:08 < ldlework> But I feel like I've arrived at its proper utterance
15:08 < ldlework> Sorry xalbo
15:08 < ldlework> I want to know the property of those facts.
15:08 < ldlework> Not the property of anything to do with the deducer
15:08 < dutchie> so why not {didni}?
15:09 < ldlework> That characterizes Holmes
15:09 < durka42> {nusna}
15:09 < ldlework> Not the collection of facts
15:09 < dutchie> ah yes
15:09 < ldlework> An really
15:09 < durka42> you sure like the sound of your own voice :p
15:09 < ldlework> I'd love just a general observation
15:09 < ldlework> Not just a lojbanic one
15:09 < ldlework> it seems a very subtle semantic
15:09 < ldlework> especially in face of what it really meants to logically entail
15:09 < durka42> I'm still not sure what you were getting at
15:09 < durka42> with all those rhetorical questions
15:10 < durka42> were you trying to get us to say "evidence"?
15:10 < ldlework> dutchie: do you feel that you do?
15:10 < ldlework> just polling, not insinuating
15:10 < ldlework> In the same way that some facts, by their own nature, can entail some logically cromulent conclusion
15:10 < ldlework> What can we say about facts that allows a detective to create deductions based on them
15:11 < ldlework> We say that the facts entail the conclusion, we don't speak of the logician
15:11 < dutchie> i think you've finally figured it out, and it is a valid question
15:11 < ldlework> But here, we say that Holmes uses these facts to deduced
15:11 < ldlework> What can we say about Holmes' facts, that are sufficient to allow him to use them for deduction
15:11 < ldlework> If not "entailment"
15:11 < durka42> he doesn't deduce, though
15:11 < durka42> he induces
15:12 < durka42> he just uses patterns
15:12 < ldlework> durka42: sure we already covered that distinction
15:12 < dutchie> natlang pedanticism that i think is irrelevant
15:12 < durka42> right but it's inaccurate to say "what allows him to deduce"
15:12 < ldlework> durka42: okay regardless of the verb we use to describe the behavior of the agent
15:12 < durka42> if something allowed him to use deduction, then he would nibli
15:12 < ldlework> moving on from that
15:12 < ldlework> what verb can we use for the facts
15:12 < ldlework> what verb makes facts valid for induction that allows for the prosecution of law and so on
15:12 < dutchie> ve nusna?
15:12 < durka42> "suggest" in english
15:12 < ldlework> IE so sufficient that everyone is satisfied in their conclusion they lead do
15:12 < dutchie> suggest is probably too weak
15:13 < dutchie> maybe there isn't an english word
15:13 < ldlework> The only word I know that even gets close to the semantic we're exloring is suggest
15:13 < ldlework> I also thought entail
15:13 < ldlework> In the way that we've proved who comitted the crime
15:13 < dutchie> implies
15:13 < ldlework> But logic is in a tower we can't access here
15:13 < dutchie> these words are (unsurprisingly) all bound up with formal logic sematics
15:13 < ldlework> exactly...
15:14 < ldlework> Maybe it is logic that Holmes is using. A difference sense, but one that involves the rational implications of givens that arrive at conclusoins etc etc
15:15 < ldlework> A sense of which is enough to put people to death and so on
15:15 < durka42> a different nibli3 then
15:15 < ldlework> Even though it can never be _entailed_
15:15 < dutchie> there is certainly a difference between pure/mathematical/formal logic and everyday/detective/legal logic
15:16 < dutchie> perhaps nibli3 is enough? it definitely bears further thinking about
15:16 < ldlework> Well if you ask me
15:16 < ldlework> I think that people sayin nibli in normal conversation should be addressed as it is with Holms
15:16 < ldlework> only when a nibli3 is provided
15:16 < dutchie> maybe i'll post to the mriste
15:16 < ldlework> should you start attacking people based on specific rules of logic and so on
15:16 < ldlework> I still think that xalbo's wider point about what entailment means is true
15:16 < ldlework> fundamentally true
15:16 < ldlework> objectively true
15:17 < ldlework> but true in a way that doesn't address at all how we talk to each other
15:17 < durka42> it kinda has to be context dependent
15:17 < ldlework> IE, the truer true
15:17 < ldlework> language is not true or false most of the time
15:17 < durka42> some lujvo like {cmacynibli} and {holmes zei nibli} can help to disambiguate
15:17 < ldlework> haha
15:17 < ldlework> Lojban will eventually become a mockery of itself..
15:18 < durka42> well obviously I don't mean literally {holmes zei nibli}
15:18 < ldlework> durka42: sure, but I enjoyed the joke
15:19 < dutchie> e'u sa'u tolcmacyni'i
15:20 < dutchie> si zo tolcmacyni'i
15:20 < durka42> maybe {cmacyni'i} and {jijyni'i}
15:20 < durka42> la .cirlak. cu jijyni'i certu
15:21 < dutchie> {jijyni'i} is good
15:21 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/biglogji?bg=1;langidarg=2 ????!?!?!??
15:21 < durka42> .w deontic
15:21 < fenki> "Deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek δέον, deon, 'obligation, duty'[1]|) is the normative ethical position that judges the morality of an action based on the action's adherence to a rule or rules." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deontic
15:21 < dutchie> that's a lot of big words
15:22 < zipcpi> Not sure about logji. Maybe flese is better; but flese's place structure... oi
15:22 < ldlework> We could create a gismu
15:22 < ldlework> IE a fundamental predicate
15:22 < ldlework> So we can create all sorts of colored implications
15:22 < zipcpi> flese is already a gismu; the problem is that it's a Curtis gismu
15:22 < durka42> indeed
15:23 < ldlework> We could create a gismu
15:23 < durka42> do we need a gismu?
15:23 < ldlework> Its pretty close to nibli
15:23 < ldlework> IE, its pretty damned fundamental
15:23 < ldlework> and would allow us to create vocabulary on top it
15:23 < ldlework> that thing I just said
15:23 < zipcpi> Er, {indika}?
15:24 < durka42> {jijyni'i}?
15:24 < ldlework> fu'ivla
15:24 < zipcpi> No, do you mean you want a gismu for {indika}?
15:24 < ldlework> So nothing deserves a gismu
15:24 < ldlework> Just polling for the underlying valuation here...
15:25 < zipcpi> I did leave a comment on {indika} for possible gismu-ization
15:25 < zipcpi> And maybe even a BAI
15:25 < durka42> nah, you were making a blanket ad-ridiculum statement, which makes it really hard to talk to you :)
15:25 < ldlework> durka42: thanks, I was worried this conversation had gone too long without making a comment on my personality
15:25 < dutchie> we were doing so well
15:26 < ldlework> Oh I forgot my smiley face
15:27 < durka42> whatever "underlying valuation" means, I have a high bar on gimy'inda personally, so if the lujvo works I don't see a need to gismuize it
15:27 < durka42> but I could be convinced
15:27 < durka42> that's why I asked
15:27 < zipcpi> Well crap... didni vs nusna
15:28 < ldlework> I said "How about a gismu"
15:28 < ldlework> and you guys made non-gismu suggestions
15:28 < ldlework> And I said "Okay so no gismu ever."
15:28 < ldlework> As to tease out your valuations on what deserves a gismu and what doesn't
15:28 < zipcpi> I was asking what you wanted to make a gismu
15:28 < ldlework> zipcpi: I know I'm replying to durka42's implication that none of my speech makes any sense
15:28 < ctefaho> ldlework: I for one love gismu
15:29 < durka42> yeah it's just weird that "maybe not a gismu for this" is equivalent to "no gismu ever"
15:29 < ctefaho> but the ones I add keep getting vandalized
15:29 < durka42> maybe it's just case-b-ycase
15:29 < ldlework> durka42: really because you identified it as taking your position to the extreme
15:29 < durka42> case-by-case*
15:29 < ldlework> exactly what I intended to do
15:29 < durka42> but why would you do that
15:29 < durka42> it's rude
15:29 < ldlework> Why? only if I'm trying to be rude
15:29 < ldlework> I did it as something ti distinguish against
15:29 < durka42> that is _not_ how rudeness works, llol
15:29 < ldlework> I didn't then go and make your personality about not wanting gismu ever
15:29 < ldlework> I didn't characterize you
15:29 < ldlework> note what is really rude
15:30 < durka42> this is a stupid conversation
15:30 < ldlework> Agreed
15:30 < ldlework> can you please stop prompting it?
15:30 < ldlework> daily?
15:30 < ldlework> sometimes more frequently than that?
15:30 < ldlework> Stop making conversation about people and then saying "omg lets stop doing this"
15:30 < ldlework> just skip to the "don't do it" part
15:30 < durka42> I'm not going to dignify that with a response, other than "I'm not going to dignify that with a response".
15:30 < ldlework> regardless of how tempted you are
15:30  * ctefaho goes back to making awesome jbo-stuff alone
15:30 < ldlework> durka42: yes, you're very dignified as is
15:32 < durka42> so should we jbovlastegau {cmacyni'i} and {jijyni'i}?
15:32 < durka42> or do we need a gismu? I'd be content to base these on {nibli} and call that the fundamental concept, but perhaps someone has a different opinion
15:32 < zipcpi> What's wrong with {indika}?
15:32 < durka42> well, can it be defined in lojban?
15:33 < durka42> if not, we need some more words :)
15:33 < zipcpi> If we want to define it on Bayesian logic, we can
15:34 < durka42> only kind o' logic there is
15:34 < ctefaho> hey how about merging all brivla into one word form
15:34  * durka42 looks around furtively for any frequentists hiding in the shadows
15:34 < durka42> I've never seen a frequentist in here, so the probability of finding one is zero
15:34 < durka42> xo'o
15:34 < ldlework> I don't see how nibli is the foundation for this went we went so far to show that this isn't nibli
15:35 < durka42> I thought we eventually circled back around to saying it _was_ nibli but with a different nibli3
15:35 < ldlework> And it is some isolate concept not well represented in lojban or english
15:35 < ldlework> Let's ask xalbo
15:35 < durka42> ctefaho: we could just number all the gismu and say {mi rodypavoreci la .bastn.}
15:35 < ctefaho> ldlework: propose a gismu with def and I can put it somewhere
15:35 < ctefaho> durka42: brodaxiPA
15:35 < ldlework> ctefaho: I don't know how gismu generation works at all
15:36 < dutchie> ctefaho: uisai
15:36 < dutchie> si u'i
15:36 < dutchie> sai
15:36 < ctefaho> ldlework: well the consonants must not conflict but I don't know where that list is online
15:36 < ctefaho> I have the gismu generator, lemme see if I can find them rules
15:36 < ldlework> Also it seems other's are opposed to gismu for some reason
15:36 < ctefaho> ...right I hadn't installed python
15:37 < ldlework> I think durka42 because he has established it is nibli based
15:37 < ldlework> durka42: is that fair?
15:37 < ldlework> Why gismu if we've established its derrivative?
15:37 < zipcpi> lo ni'ai ke'a nilyla'e febu va'o fabu cu dubzma lo ni'ai ke'a nilyla'e febo va'onai fabu
15:37 < durka42> you think that I what?
15:37 < ctefaho> ldlework: I for one do at least have an idea what should be in zi'evla/lujvo/gismu
15:37 < durka42> en:ni'ai
15:37 < mensi> ni'ai = [NU] x1 is a number/value such that the abstraction is true, under mathematical system x2 // x1 binds to ke'a
15:37 < mensi> within the abstraction.
15:37 < ldlework> durka42: don't want a gismu, but a lujvo because we decided the concept is derrivative of nibli?
15:37 < zipcpi> Numeric poi'i
15:37 < ctefaho> ...but not sure if I can define it well right now 1 minute before going sipna
15:38 < ctefaho> others just doesn't seem to care about the distinction
15:38 < durka42> zipcpi: looks good for {indika}
15:38 < durka42> the only real advantage of gismu is they can have short rafsi, pe'i
15:38 < ctefaho> see logbanu for where that's gonna go
15:39 < ldlework> ctefaho: where what's going to go?
15:39 < durka42> ldlework: well, I thought that's what we decided
15:39 < ctefaho> durka42: yeah gismu should be the only ones with short rafsi imo
15:39 < ldlework> durka42: yeah I was just reiterating to make sure that was also your reasoning for lujvo
15:39 < ctefaho> ldlework: https://newlojban.wordpress.com/
15:39 < ldlework> I swear I haven't been trying to be snide or impolite at any point in this conversation
15:39 < ctefaho> merging zi'evla and lujvo which selpai is doing
15:40 < ldlework> ctefaho: I don't understand how that's possible
15:40 < ldlework> does he have an article?
15:40 < ldlework> I don't mean cmavo :D
15:40 < ctefaho> well logbanu tinkers with the morphology a bit
15:40 < ctefaho> https://newlojban.wordpress.com/root-words/
15:40 < ctefaho> err wait
15:40 < ctefaho> wrong
15:40 < ldlework> oh god "new lojban"
15:40 < ctefaho> https://newlojban.wordpress.com/morphology-2/
15:40 < ldlework> ctefaho: selpahi is responsible for this?
15:40 < ctefaho> (ASSUMING selpai hasn't droppped logbanu completely)
15:41 < ctefaho> ldlework: yep, his work
15:41 < ldlework> I wish that selpahi would hear me out about some of my ideas related to descriptions but it seems he is resolute in his own ideas about them
15:41 < durka42> it's hard to know what selpahi is and isn't working on, .u'i
15:42 < ldlework> I don't mind inventing a new lojban under selpahi since I trust him but I lament that I cannot meaningfully contribute to his model.
15:42 < ctefaho> selpai hasn't been on irc much though so I haven't had time to talk with him either
15:42 < ctefaho> ldlework, what ideas?
15:42 < ldlework> ctefaho: basically speech acts and how reference works.
15:42 < ctefaho> I am kind of tinkering with my own dialect but maybe I will be the only one to speak it, who knows
15:42 < ldlework> ideas that are valiantly partially expressed by what's going on with gadganzu
15:43 < ctefaho> what are these ideas, in brief?
15:43 < ldlework> Basically I think we've made a mistake in trying to strangle the caclulus of fopl until the point where we can speak it outloud
15:43 < ldlework> Rather than starting from language and trying to create a human language informed by the principles of fopl
15:43 < ldlework> And I think a lot of problems arise from doing the first
15:43 < Amnadya> merging lujvo and zihevla is the same as removing rafsi assignments
15:44 < ldlework> And that more and more strange bandaids arise from not getting the fundamental modeling of language quite right
15:44 < dutchie> ldlework: is it perhaps a bit late to change that with lojban?
15:44 < dutchie> though possibly the best place to recruit people to your cause
15:44 < ctefaho> ldlework: Is this kinda like "semantics before logic"?
15:44 < ldlework> dutchie: I think that mostly all that needs to change is how we perform reference
15:44 < ldlework> And I think that reference has been traditionally hard for lojban because 1, of trying to interpret existential variables as the same thing we mean by "linguistic reference"
15:44 < ldlework> And the fact that the ideas of reference are still evolving actively
15:45 < dutchie> je'e
15:45 < ldlework> I mean in the wider philosophical and linguistic fields
15:45 < ldlework> I think this is why lojban's description system changed in the pas too
15:45 < ldlework> Because it really was, any time you make a description, you make an existential assertion
15:45 < ldlework> which we all eventually agreed is innane for an actual language
15:45 < ldlework> with xorlo
15:46 < ldlework> I think lojban's centricity around the proposition is ideal. I think this is lojban's major achievement.
15:46 < dutchie> ie
15:46 < ldlework> It just so happens that fopl is also central around the proposition, so by abusing it for language we just got lucky
15:46 < ldlework> It doesn't work the same when you open the fopl box to explain reference, rather than the language philsophy box.
15:47 < ctefaho> sorry what is "proposition" in this context? the bridi?
15:47 < ldlework> ctefaho: yeah, but minus any illocutionary force
15:47 < ldlework> so just the references and the predicates
15:47 < ctefaho> also sorry again "illocutionary force"?
15:48 < ldlework> the recent discovery in the philosophy of language as it pertains to analyzing speech with the tools of logical analytics is that reference is actually a separate act from the propositional act
15:48 < ldlework> uh
15:48  * ctefaho actuallt jsut googles everything
15:48 < ldlework> John smokes.
15:48 < ldlework> Does John smoke?
15:48 < ldlework> John smoke!
15:48 < ldlework> all contain the same proposition but the eventual illocutionary force is different for each
15:49 < ctefaho> I think this is kinda what some of my own insights are I just don't really know the terms
15:49 < ldlework> What I have been reading is that if you want to analyze these statements logically, you must first seaprate the act of reference from the propositional one
15:49 < ldlework> IE
15:49 < ldlework> the thing that is being predicated by the verb "smokes" isn't the description "john"
15:49 < ldlework> Its whoever the speaker meant by that description
15:49 < ldlework> IE the logical expansion doesn't involve the name at any point
15:49 < ldlework> IE when I say
15:50 < ldlework> The dog is old
15:50 < ldlework> The argument to 'is-old' isn't some existentially dog quantified thing
15:50 < ldlework> reference is a seaprate act
15:50 < dutchie> i'm curious; are you a linguist by education/training?
15:50 < ldlework> all there is to fall under the purview of logical analytics is da old
15:50 < ldlework> dutchie: I'm absolutely nothing by education or training
15:50 < ldlework> I never attended school beyond grade school
15:51 < dutchie> fair enough
15:51 < ldlework> I just read the literature
15:54 < ctefaho> Not sure if I understand you correctly, but this "referential" acts vs. the propositional, is that "lo broda" vs "[zo'e] broda"?
15:56 < ldlework> I'm not going to argue which existential variable cmavo you want to use to represent x in Ex
15:56 < ldlework> But the point is, in fopl, the x doesn't _mean_ anything, it only gains meaning through predication
15:57 < ldlework> The mistake lojban made is that our descriptions are involved in this logical predication
15:57 < ldlework> rather than a utility in speech to get our listeners to identify what is inside the Ex, so we can subsequently go on to say things about whatever is inside that x
15:58 < ldlework> if you have to model it sensibly any given utterance passes through several stages
15:58 < ldlework> first it is uttered
15:58 < ldlework> then its referents are resolved
15:58 < ldlework> rather
15:58 < ldlework> its description terms are resolved into referents
15:58 < ldlework> then _referents_ partake in a proposition along with some predicate
15:59 < ldlework> then an illocutionary force uses the proposition to perform some speech act
15:59 < ldlework> Wow, that's amazing!
15:59 < ldlework> then we resolve what 'that' refers to
15:59 < ldlework> Wow, Ex amazing
15:59 < ldlework> drop the illocutionary forces
15:59 < ldlework> Ex amazing
15:59 < ldlework> "there exist something for which it is amazing"
16:00 < ldlework> Let's do the same thing to a description using thing
16:00 < ldlework> oh btw, the "Wow" comes back, to provide the illocutionary force
16:00 < ldlework> Wow, Bob is amazing!
16:00 < ldlework> Wow, Ex is amazing => amazes(x)
16:00 < ldlework> Wow, That bike is amazing
16:00 < ldlework> Wow, Ex is amazing => amazes(x)
16:01 < ldlework> Predicate logic is inherently devoted to the task of discovering logical entailment between predicates
16:01 < ldlework> If we come up with some axioms about predicate A
16:01 < ldlework> And some axioms about predicate B
16:01 < ldlework> We can then make conclusions about things that are A based on their qualities of being B
16:01 < ldlework> This is different than when I say "the dog is hungy"
16:01 < ldlework> "the dog" does not exist as a predicate in the logical entailment
16:02 < ldlework> When I say
16:02 < ldlework> These, which are dogs, are hungry because of their dogness.
16:02 < ldlework> I have imported the description into the logical entailment
16:02 < ldlework> But I don't do that, all I have said is
16:02 < ldlework> hungry(x)
16:02 < ldlework> Dog does not fall under the purview of whether the statement is true
16:02 < ldlework> Because the truth of dog(x) must be considered seprately
16:03 < ldlework> and modern language philosophers will tell you that we don't ever do this when we are communicating with speech
16:03 < ldlework> We never import the truth-value of descriptions into the truth-value of propositions involing the referents of those descriptions
16:03 < ldlework> It may be false that that referent is a man, but nevertheless, I care to say that referent is noisy.
16:04 < ldlework> The man is noisy.
16:04 < ldlework> The truth-bearingness of descriptions has everything to do with the utility of the description to refer.
16:04 < ldlework> Not to assert.
16:04 < ldlework> And in certain contexts false-beariness is -more- important
16:04 < zipcpi> Well it almost as if we're rediscovering what was somewhat problematically referred to as "non-veridicality"
16:05 < ldlework> zipcpi: its more of the observation that all speech is potentially non-veridical
16:05 < ldlework> and that the default referring act is veridical
16:05 < ldlework> And that specifically denoting whether the description is truth-bearing upon the referent is rarely, if ever, adding value to speech or logical analytics
16:06 < ctefaho> (also hey zipcpi did you see these https://newlojban.wordpress.com/novel-cmavo/ )
16:06 < ldlework> under the purview of logical analytics, xorlo show's the absurdity of the conclusion
16:06 < ctefaho> ldlework: I think I understand, somewhat, just need some time to process
16:06 < ldlework> under the purview of language philosophy, philosophyers are telling its na'e
16:06 < ldlework> its "irrelevant"
16:06 < zipcpi> Don't you mean na'i
16:06 < ldlework> yeah thanks
16:06 < ldlework> na'i
16:06 < ctefaho> It sounds kinda compatible with what I am doing too
16:07 < ctefaho> I have been striving to "preserve the truth" of bridi's in my rules for expansion
16:07 < ldlework> Its a conflation of language and logical calulus where we usually say something like
16:07 < ldlework> all men are mortal
16:07 < ldlework> x is a man
16:07 < ctefaho> with default NA as ja'a for *every* bridi
16:07 < ldlework> therefore x is a mortal
16:07 < ldlework> x is a man does NOT REPRESENT NOUN PHRASES
16:08 < ldlework> and yet
16:08 < ldlework> when we "logically expand" most lojanic utterances
16:08 < ldlework> we include the description predicates in those expansions
16:08 < ldlework> so either the original logicians make a simple excusable conflation
16:08 < ldlework> or the philosophy of language as a whole is headed in the wrong direction
16:08 < ldlework> the ego of lojbanists will have a lot to say on that question
16:09 < ldlework> But I argue its far simplier
16:09 < ctefaho> in my dialect that just becomes "That which wasn't really a man after all, IS INDEED smoking"
16:09 < ldlework> and the correction is largely a simplification of lojban's gadri system
16:09 < zipcpi> Well we made {le'elkai} to "shield" the referring description from the predication; so maybe all we need is another magic predicate for xorlo
16:09 < zipcpi> {xorlokai}
16:09 < ldlework> I've never heard of {le'ekai} so I have no idea what you mean.
16:09 < ldlework> Also I believe the correction can be made at the level of the existential variable
16:09 < zipcpi> Ilmen made it while watching me talk about {le}
16:09 < ldlework> rather than the gadri
16:10 < ldlework> and the result is that a self-consistent system of gadri arises
16:10 < ldlework> but it will never be self-consistent if we must base it upon the logical conflation
16:10 < ctefaho> ldlework: would love to discuss this more but I really got to to sleep now. did save all you said though.
16:10 < ldlework> ctefaho: I've been talking about this singular topic for weeks maybe going on multiple months now
16:10 < zipcpi> I'm not sure I can agree with making it impossible to refer to the existential variable
16:11 < ctefaho> I have been a bit busy fixing...stuff last weeks to consider these things fully
16:11 < ldlework> zipcpi: you never refer to the existential variable
16:11 < ldlework> the existential variable contains the referent of your description
16:11 < ldlework> Its like a map
16:11 < ldlework> descriptions are a map to the city
16:11 < ldlework> the predicate of your propsoition is the thing you exclaim when you first see the city
16:11 < ldlework> "melbi!"
16:11 < ldlework> the map is not beautiful
16:11 < zipcpi> And some existential variables don't have *any* descriptions attached to them
16:11 < ldlework> the map only helped us identify what is beautiful
16:11 < ldlework> zipcpi: right like, I argue, zo'e
16:12 < ldlework> or da
16:12 < ldlework> they both just represnt the thing to which you want to refer
16:12 < ldlework> IE, you're just supposed to know where the city is
16:12 < ldlework> you don't get a map
16:12 < ldlework> but I'll tell you about that city anyway
16:12 < ldlework> da melbi
16:12 < ldlework> infact here
16:12 < ldlework> I'm not even telling you it is a city
16:12 < ldlework> I'm just telling you something exists and it is beautiful
16:12 < ldlework> and even in the sentence
16:13 < ldlework> "The city is beautiful"
16:13 < ldlework> I only mean to say "some thing is beautiful"
16:13 < ctefaho> ldlework: Does and if so how does your "da melbi" and "zo'e melbi" differ?
16:13 < ldlework> Whether or not the variable refers to a definite reference or not
16:13 < ldlework> definite referent*
16:14 < zipcpi> But now you have added a qualifier to that thing. You may not be veridically referring it as a city, but you are trying to restrict it from a mere 'something"
16:14 < ldlework> zipcpi: but only in the reference act
16:14 < ldlework> not in the propositional one
16:14 < ldlework> I only refer, so that you know what to stick into melbi1
16:14 < ldlework> once you have identified my referents
16:14 < ldlework> the descriptions decay
16:14 < ldlework> they become irrelevant
16:14 < zipcpi> da poi le'elkai lo ka tcadu zo'u: da melbi
16:14 < ldlework> it is only important that the refernce was consumated
16:14 < ctefaho> ugh zipcpi pls
16:15 < zipcpi> exp: da poi le'elkai lo ka tcadu zo'u: da melbi
16:15 < mensi> ([{da <poi (¹CU [le'elkai {lo <ka (²CU [tcadu VAU]²) KEI> KU} VAU]¹) KUhO>} zo'u] [da {CU <melbi VAU>}])
16:15 < ldlework> If you think about it
16:15 < ldlework> the citiness isn't important to the content of the message at all
16:15 < zipcpi> That's what le'elkai is for
16:15 < ldlework> whether that thing is beautiful isn't *predicated* on whether it is a city or not
16:15 < ldlework> zipcpi: I'm telling you, language philosophy is telling us it is never important
16:16 < ldlework> if it was important, the predicate "city" would appear in the proposition
16:16 < ldlework> Well it is also important to confused logicians
16:16 < ldlework> Who are trying to udnerstand langauge *only* through logical calclulus
16:16 < ldlework> Wherein everything must be veridical
16:16 < ldlework> and included in the proposition
16:16 < ldlework> (what you're doing)
16:16 < ldlework> (and then making a narticle the n"unimport" the predicate, lol)
16:17 < ldlework> just don't import the description predicate
16:17 < ldlework> and be done
16:17 < ldlework> lo broda cu brode => da brode
16:17 < zipcpi> le'elkai solves that problem. It abstracts {lo ka tcadu} from any requirement of veridicality, and just means "That which is described by this predicate"
16:17 < ldlework> There isn't a problem
16:17 < ldlework> to solve
16:17 < ldlework> don't import the description into the quantified proposition
16:17 < zipcpi> That which is imputed "cityness" for the purposes of description, regardless of whether it is a city
16:17 < ldlework> then you don't need to include it just to say it isn't included
16:18 < zipcpi> But the semantic of "cityness" is relevant somewhere
16:18 < ldlework> to the act of referring
16:18 < zipcpi> Otherwise we'd have no need for gadri at all, and just refer to {da} all the time
16:18 < ldlework> not to the act of determining whether the predicate is true of the referents
16:18 < ldlework> wrong
16:18 < ldlework> gadri has the specifc purpose of allowing us to refer
16:18 < ldlework> da doesn't allow us to refer
16:18 < ldlework> it only allows us to make existential assertions
16:18 < zipcpi> I'm saying the semantic belongs somewhere, even if we aren't asserting the predicate
16:18 < ldlework> It doesn't
16:19 < ldlework> what is the goal in expanding the utterance to a lgoical form?
16:19 < ldlework> for which including description predicates serves?
16:19 < ldlework> To prove whether my referent is true of the description? or to prove the referent is true of the verb?
16:19 < ldlework> seriously
16:19 < ldlework> consider that
16:19 < zipcpi> da = "something/ some object", da poi broda then restricts it to those that broda
16:19 < ldlework> don't
16:19 < ldlework> just answer the utilitarian question
16:19 < ldlework> what is your end goal to expand anything
16:19 < zipcpi> But we don't want {le tcadu} or even {lo tcadu} to be {da poi tcadu}
16:19 < ldlework> what?
16:20 < ldlework> its na'i
16:20 < ldlework> reference is a separate act than any of the illocutionary ones
16:20 < ldlework> John is beautiful.
16:20 < ldlework> The city is beautiful
16:20 < ctefaho> ldlework: well unless I am completely confused, the predicate is obviously about whether the argument fits the predicate rather than the argument fitting its referent?
16:21 < ldlework> No information that helps us determine the truth-bearingness of the statement, whether the referent behind the John-curtain is beaitufil, by knowing the referents name
16:21 < ldlework> No imfortaion that helps us determine the truth-bearningness of the statement, whether the referent behind the City-curtain is beautiful, by knowing that the thing is a city.
16:21 < zipcpi> You are, by your descriptions, qualifying, restricting what the sumti could refer to, even if you aren't necessarily describing it veridically
16:21 < ldlework> Yes but my statement doesn't say
16:21 < ldlework> "Only cities are beautiful"
16:21 < ldlework> which is what logicans do
16:21 < ldlework> when they say
16:22 < zipcpi> {po'o} is not implied
16:22 < ldlework> use the transitive property to relate the predicate city and the predicate beautiful
16:22 < ctefaho> {lo prenu cu jmaji jecu jukpa jecu citka} - The truth of them gathering and cooking and eating is obviously separate from whether the "lo prenu" semantically fits "prenu"?
16:22 < ldlework> "propositional logic"
16:22 < ldlework> it deals with the entailment of -predicates-
16:22 < ldlework> If one predicate entails the other
16:22 < ldlework> And x is one predicate
16:22 < ldlework> x must be the other predicate
16:23 < ldlework> this has nothing to do with language, beyond what is determined -in the proposition-!
16:23 < ldlework> IE, the referents predicated through some predicate
16:23 < ldlework> When you quantify something in logic you are not saying
16:23 < ldlework> I'm referring to some dogs
16:23 < ldlework> Some dogs are beautiful
16:23 < ldlework> that's now how it works
16:23 < ldlework> yo uare trying to establish relationships betweeen -predicates-
16:24 < ldlework> You are making qualitative rules for what something is, if it is also something else
16:24 < ldlework> When I say
16:24 < ldlework> The city is beautiful
16:24 < ldlework> I don't mean to entail either of those predicates with each other
16:24 < ldlework> in any way
16:24 < ldlework> they are not related in any form
16:24 < ldlework> nothing about citieness has anything to do with beautifulness, as predicates and that's the only thing fopl will ever address
16:24 < zipcpi> That which I describe as a "city" is beautiful
16:24 < ldlework> This is why reference is a seprarte act
16:24 < ldlework> yes
16:25 < ldlework> so in your logical expansion
16:25 < ldlework> there is one predicate
16:25 < ldlework> and one referent
16:25 < ldlework> nothing in fopl has anything to say about
16:25 < ldlework> things which you describe as cities
16:25 < ctefaho> I think I agree with you as far as I understand. How is this controversial?
16:25 < ldlework> and their logical entailment to beauty
16:25 < ldlework> ctefaho: because logicans, who work on language, *must* as a measure of their own applicability, conflate this
16:25 < ctefaho> .u'i
16:26 < ldlework> fopl is a calculus of predicates
16:26 < zipcpi> The {ka} predicate is merely to show how the speaker describes it, which, under {le'elkai}, restricts {da} to that referent, and not a mere "something that exists"
16:26 < ctefaho> well I am happily tearing shit out in STT
16:26 < ldlework> zipcpi: the only reason you ever do fopl is to prove a relation between two predicates
16:26 < ctefaho> I just want a language to think in and this...logical weirdness, I am allergic to it
16:26 < ldlework> what is the relationship between is-a-city and the predicate is-pretty
16:26 < ldlework> that is established in the sentence, "that city is pretty"
16:27 < zipcpi> No, now the relationship is is-the-referent-described-by-the-speaker-by-citiness
16:27 < ldlework> what?
16:27 < zipcpi> da poi le'elkai lo ka tcadu
16:27 < ldlework> stop inventing things to explain your confusion
16:27 < ctefaho> but I am going to sleep now, will happily discuss more tomorrow, you and zipcpi can probably have a constructive debate meanwhile
16:28 < ldlework> ctefaho: co'o
16:28 < ctefaho> so co'o rodo
16:28 < ldlework> zipcpi: if we're going to expand lojban to statements that can be formally analyzed you don't get to embed speech conventions into your analysis
16:28 < ldlework> all you have is DA PA and BRODA
16:28 < ldlework> that's all fopl has
16:29 < ldlework> fopl can't tell you anything about the statement if you use anything beyond what it itself haves
16:29 < ldlework> Given this constraint, you will invent pre-xorlo lojban
16:29  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
16:29 < ldlework> Because that's all mere fopl can give us, as far a linguistics go
16:29 < ldlework> you -can't really use fopl as language-
16:29 < ldlework> its a lie
16:30 < ldlework> What you can do is invent a language, that easily resolves down to fopl assertions, and analyze those
16:30 < ldlework> I'm telling you, that in order to realize _what is really being asserted_ in language
16:30 < zipcpi> I am just not convinced by your assertion that the description adds nothing to the predication
16:30 < ldlework> you must perform reference as a separate act
16:31 < ldlework> zipcpi: in certain forms it does
16:31 < ldlework> IE when you're talking about predicates themselves
16:31 < ldlework> IE with indefinite descriptions
16:31 < ldlework> BAM now we know why indefintie descriptions have never been formalized logically
16:31 < ldlework> outside of strange exceptional rules of scope that no one agrees on
16:32 < ldlework> Because indefinite descriptions refer to predicates not truth-bearing referents
16:32 < ldlework> But I'm getting ahead of myself since I don't want to introduce this formalization of indefinite descriptions yet
16:32 < ldlework> zipcpi: also, definite statements formed existentially also refer to predicates
16:32 < ldlework> All men are mortal
16:32 < ldlework> Nothing is referred.
16:33 < ldlework> The man who killed Smith, is insane.
16:33 < ldlework> Nothing is referred!
16:33 < ldlework> Except predicates.
16:33 < ldlework> In which we create logical entailments between predicates, but not referents.
16:33 < ldlework> The goal of definite reference is to apply a predicate to that which is not a predicate.
16:33 < ldlework> IE a definite reference.
16:34 < ldlework> If you think deeply about this, you will suddenly understand generalizations.
16:34 < ldlework> And how "I like cats" only has one referent.
16:34 < zipcpi> And what's wrong with something meaning "is the definite referent", as opposed to some other city that you were not referring to with "the city"?
16:34 < ldlework> what?
16:36 < ldlework> zipcpi: because you never want the opposite
16:36 < ldlework> Or rather, at least when trying to apply logical analytics to speech.
16:36 < ldlework> Otherwise you run into the same problem everyone else has in attempting to do just that.
16:37 < zipcpi> But you are qualifying it. It may be impractical to qualify it to mean one/some particular cities, but you mean to do that with the description and the context
16:37 < ldlework> You say I'm qualifying, and then you say something I don't understand.
16:38 < zipcpi> "The city" could mean, say, Houston. If it is, then you are referring to Houston, not another city, or a cat
16:38 < ldlework> Yeah, exactly
16:38 < ldlework> So the only thing involved with the assertion is
16:39 < ldlework> whatever is behind the curtain of my description
16:39 < ldlework> and whatever predicate I asserted about it
16:39 < ldlework> therefore if you wanted to logically analyze my speech
16:39 < ldlework> the predicate contained in my description -has no bearing on that truth value-
16:39 < zipcpi> Neither does {lo se le'elkai}
16:39 < ldlework> zipcpi: Show me the specific fopl calculus that has a similar construct
16:40 < ldlework> zipcpi: Then explain to me how including the description, even with your superflous article, contributes to logical analytics of the assertion?
16:40 < zipcpi> It's exactly why {le'elkai} is "magic", it's meant to restrict {da} to be whatever you may be talking about at the time
16:40 < ldlework> No
16:40 < ldlework> It does *nothing*
16:40 < ldlework> literally nothing
16:40 < ldlework> except to add noise to that which you're trying to analyze
16:41 < ldlework> My goal is to understand the truth-bearingness of some expression
16:41 < ldlework> But now I have it interprete /then disregard/ this clause
16:41 < ldlework> just because.... you invented it?
16:41 < ldlework> Certainly not because it -contributes to the goal of analytics-
16:41 < zipcpi> The description means something. It's not the main assertion, but the things you typically describe as {le tcadu} would be quite different from the things you'd describe as {le mlatu}
16:41 < ldlework> okay you repeated your position
16:41 < ldlework> which means I have had no effect
16:41 < ldlework> the repetition of your position doesn't do anything to convince me
16:42 < ldlework> so I'd say we're at an impasse
16:42 < ldlework> which is okay, and not to the detriment of anyone's character
16:42 < ldlework> so let's just decide reasonable people can disagree on this point, as they have in the past
16:42 < zipcpi> I could say the same thing about you; you keep asserting that descriptions add nothing
16:42 < ldlework> I ask you to meditate on what the goal, the actual attempted accomplishment is deisred when applying logical analytics to some statement.
16:42 < ldlework> zipcpi: I also give tons of texts to supplant them
16:42 < ldlework> that are not merely tautologies
16:43 < ldlework> in fact I've gone to the extents of various directions in attempts to justify that which I assert
16:43 < ldlework> Giving reasoning about the purpose of the thing you wish to conflate
16:43 < ldlework> Consider what fopl is *for*
16:44 < ldlework> And consider what people who actually study language (not me, but those who I invoke on my behalf) are saying about how descriptions relate to logic
16:44 < ldlework> If you can answer the question what fopl is for
16:44 < ldlework> You will realize that including referring descriptions doesn't contribute to that goal
16:45 < ldlework> making your article and your justification for it superflous
16:45 < ldlework> in that it doesn't address the underlying goal that you're trying to serve
16:45 < ldlework> you're trying to expand something in the language to  form which is perceptable to a certain kind of analytics
16:45 < ldlework> but you ignore the goal of that analytics, skip right over it
16:46 < ldlework> Also its very abstract so its also possible that its just hard to overcome how closely related but not isomorphic fopl and language are.
16:46 < ldlework> When we apply fopl to speech, we only care about the propositional content.
16:46 < ldlework> Since that's the only think fopl can analyze
16:46 < ldlework> If we inclde our descriptions into the fopl we get cll lojban
16:46 < ldlework> if we don't, we get post-reference propositions like I sugggest
16:47 < ldlework> If we listen to you
16:47 < ldlework> we get fopl statements that include terms that don't actually add any information that fopl cares about so you end up "ignoring it"
16:47 < ldlework> Ie, keep em in, but then tell the analyzer to ignore it
16:48 < zipcpi> But I do care when you refer to Houston and not anything else
16:48 < ldlework> I wish it could go *ping* in your mind, that it is only the da, which is true of the central propositional predicate
16:48 < ldlework> or not
16:48 < ldlework> and that's the only thing fopl cares about
16:48 < ldlework> We use single variables, like da, and multiple predicates, to establish logical entailment between those predicates that the da shares.
16:48 < ldlework> When we only do fopl
16:49 < ldlework> and we establish entailment relationships among predicates, we don't actually say what in the world is true about those predicates beyond "things which are ture about this predicate"
16:49 < ldlework> IE when we say
16:49 < ldlework> A implies B, Ex where A(x) therefore B(x)
16:50 < ldlework> We're not making assertions about what is contained in the x beyond that it is both an A and a B
16:50 < ldlework> in the statement
16:50 < ldlework> The city is beautiful
16:50 < ldlework> We *do not* wish to entail the predicates beauty and city
16:50 < ldlework> We do wish to assert that beautiful(x)
16:50 < ldlework> logically
16:50 < ldlework> and as a SPEECH ACT
16:50 < zipcpi> But we are entailing the predicates beauty and "the thing that I refer to"
16:50 < bigcentaur> coi ro do
16:50 < ldlework> I hope that you know what I mean is beautiful
16:51 < ldlework> zipcpi: no that's false
16:51 < ldlework> there's nothing about beautiful that entails being referred to by me
16:51 < ldlework> and there's nothing about being referred ot be mea that entails being beautiful
16:51 < ldlework> not in the same way that
16:51 < ldlework> man and mortal are entailed together
16:51 < ldlework> IE, the kind of entail fopl cares about
16:52 < zipcpi> There is an x, where x is magic-referring-predicate *and* x is beautiful
16:52 < ldlework> That's -----speech--------
16:52 < ldlework> Not ----------logic-----------
16:52 < ldlework> To get what you want
16:52 < ldlework> that magic referring predicate _always entails beauty_
16:53 < ldlework> because fopl discerns entailment _between predicates_
16:53 < ldlework> it does not discover invisible referents for which two predicates are true
16:53 < ldlework> When we say
16:53 < ldlework> all men are mortal
16:53 < ldlework> x is a man
16:53 < ldlework> therefore x is mortal
16:53 < ldlework> we are not making conclusions about X!
16:53 < zipcpi> For all x  where x is a man, x is mortal
16:53 < ldlework> we are making conclusions about the inherent entailment between two predicates!
16:53 < ldlework> So if what you're saying is true
16:54 < ldlework> we must entail some logical entailment of beautify by the nature of being referred to by me
16:54 < ldlework> can't you see how innane and completely wrong this is?!
16:54 < zipcpi> No, it only means for the x which you refer to
16:54 < ldlework> no
16:54 < zipcpi> x is beautiful
16:54 < ldlework> that's not what fopl does
16:54 < ldlework> to get what you want
16:54 < ldlework> it would just be
16:54 < ldlework> x is beautiful
16:54 < zipcpi> But which x?
16:54 < ldlework> It doesn't matter.
16:54 < ldlework> Because my goal in fopl
16:55 < ldlework> is not to identify what x is
16:55 < ldlework> but to entail predicates!
16:55 < ldlework> I can introduce other predicates
16:55 < hilmi-can> i really feel dumb reading that. ill try my best to catch up.
16:55 < ldlework> to entail relationships between the predicates
16:55 < ldlework> such as
16:55 < ldlework> if x is beautiful
16:55 < ldlework> x must be pretty
16:55 < ldlework> or whatever entailment you want
16:55 < ldlework> this doesn't tell us
16:55 < ldlework> that
16:55 < zipcpi> hilmi-can: Sorry, this is some rather abstract/obtuse stuff; if you have a question, please ask in #ckule
16:55 < ldlework> "a pretty" is the thing to which we refer in fopl
16:55 < ldlework> there is no reference in fopl
16:56 < ldlework> It only establishes a relationship between the predicate beautiful and pretty
16:56 < ldlework> There is no reference in fopl
16:56 < ldlework> So
16:56 < ldlework> In your attempt to expand some lojban out
16:56 < ldlework> to a form that could be analyzed
16:56 < ldlework> you are creating the WRONG PROPOSITION
16:56 < ldlework> IE, the proposition that the speaker never claimed
16:56 < ldlework> by injecting the referring description into the proposition that will eventually by analyzed
16:57 < ldlework> All cities are beautiful
16:57 < ldlework> ^THIS is an exitential statement
16:57 < ldlework> Even though it uses a referring description the description refers to a predicate!
16:57 < ldlework> not an actual city
16:57 < zipcpi> When we say da poi remna cu mroka'e; all we mean is there is an x, which is a remna, and which also is mroka'e
16:57 < ldlework> _here_ an entailment is established
16:57 < ldlework> Right
16:57 < zipcpi> There is nothing about {nibli} or whether remnaness entails mroka'eness
16:57 < ldlework> poi dodges the fopl
16:58 < ldlework> because poi has *nothing to do with analyzing the truth-bearingness of a statement*
16:58 < ldlework> poi is how you encode your original descriptions without changing the truth value
16:58 < ldlework> this is precisely why I say *all descriptions expand to the same poi ---if they must---*
16:59 < ldlework> Because to analyize the truth bearingness, to apply the principles of fopl /I don't need to know your descriptions/
16:59 < ldlework> I only need to know what you eventually referred to
16:59 < ldlework> Because it is _that thing_ which will be true of the main predicate or not
16:59 < ldlework> It doesn't matter how you got me to identify _that thing_ as the argument of the proposition
16:59 < ldlework> the proposition is not true or false of your descriptions, it is true or false of your referents
17:00 < ldlework> the description can be additionally true or false of the referent
17:00 < ldlework> but neither in logic would you care
17:00 < ldlework> or in speech
17:00 < ldlework> logicians don't care because
17:00 < ldlework> when someone says
17:00 < ldlework> The city is pretty
17:00 < dmiles_afk> most of the time we are creating assertions in logic .. i feel mostly we are defining or adding to the language for further description
17:00 < ldlework> no logican wants to formalize whether there is some entailment between those specific predicates
17:00 < ldlework> because only an insane person would think so
17:00 < ldlework> language philosophers don't care
17:00 < ldlework> Because reference is a totally separate act fromp redication.
17:01 < dmiles_afk> yet i see that often we prettend we are creating new entailments (ok we are doing that sure) but we are more involved in defining a language
17:01 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: I agree, when we make existential statements like "The man who murdered smith is insane"
17:01 < ldlework> Or "All men are mortal"
17:01 < ldlework> But not "The apple is poisonous"
17:02 < ldlework> We do not expand the semantics of the langauge when we describe external referents
17:02 < ldlework> We expand the language when we predicate predicates themselves.
17:02  * dmiles_afk thinks for a moment
17:02 < dmiles_afk> "All men are mortal" we are defining mortal based on manhood?
17:03 < dmiles_afk> hehe .. i know the other way arround .. but i thik both ways
17:03 < ldlework> We are defining an entailment between manhood based on mortality.
17:03 < ldlework> IE, the predicates is-a-man is intrinsically related to is-a-mortal in a way that is logically entailed
17:04 < ldlework> If we happen to be referring, not to the predicate is-a-man, but to _a specific man_ we create no such entailment.
17:04 < ldlework> We don't expand the semantics of "mortality"
17:04 < ldlework> And we don't even comment on the predicate is-a-man
17:05 < ldlework> Outside, perhaps, that if this man is indeed a man, that humanity may afford mortality.
17:05 < dmiles_afk> i am glad you are pointing out "this is authorial form" not logic
17:05 < ldlework> But it no longer entails it.
17:05 < ldlework> You could argue that when you make a definite reference
17:05 < ldlework> you create a nonce-predicate
17:06 < ldlework> to-be-that-thing-to-which-I-refer
17:06 < ldlework> but since it is nonce
17:06 < ldlework> you will never observe anything meaningful
17:06 < ldlework> you will never arrive at a conclusion by way of logical analytics that you couldn't arrive at without that predicate
17:06 < ldlework> it has no inherent characeristics by which it could be *inherently* related to some other predicates
17:06 < ldlework> IE, they have no logical entailment by definition
17:07 < ldlework> because that nonce verb has no meaningful definition by which you would be able to establish any entailments with any other predicates
17:07 < ldlework> except perhaps synonmous tautologies
17:08 < ldlework> anything referred to by me is a referrent
17:08 < ldlework> x is referred to by me, therefore x is a referent
17:08 < ldlework> you're never going to be able to entail is-referred-by-me, in the way the fopl was designed to, to the other predicate "beauty"
17:08 < dmiles_afk> there is this set of variables and things that i secretly thinnk have to be comoinged in
17:08 < ldlework> Maybe reference is a concept that fopl never intended t ocare about
17:09 < dmiles_afk> for example  "thereExists a me in which refers to an x"
17:09 < ldlework> and *does not become defective* by not addressing it!
17:09 < ldlework> Because the goal of fopl is not something that depends on addressing reference
17:09 < zipcpi> I don't see what's the difference in form between "all humans are mortal" and "all the cities are beautiful", except that one directly refers to things that are human, while the other points to a particular set that you describe as "cities"
17:09 < ldlework> No
17:09 < ldlework> you just cheated
17:09 < dmiles_afk> "there exists an assertion maker who assert  all humans are mortal"
17:10 < zipcpi> Then it's just {ro da melbi}?
17:10 < bigcentaur> in terms of aristotelean logic, they're of the same form, "All S is P"
17:10 < ldlework> "All men are mortal" is different than "All the cities are beautiful" and "All the men are mortal"
17:10 < ldlework> bigcentaur: right, as all logic really is
17:10 < ldlework> because logic, specifically predicate logic, is the logic of predicate entailment
17:10 < ldlework> not referents
17:10 < bigcentaur> how tautological
17:10 < bigcentaur> :P
17:10 < zipcpi> I'm just trying a different approach, to show that there is a difference between qualified {da} and unqualified {da}
17:11 < ldlework> zipcpi: there isn't
17:11 < ldlework> the real difference is referring descriptions
17:11 < ldlework> and not referring descriptions
17:11 < ldlework> IE, when we refer to predicates as to establish new entalments between them
17:11 < ldlework> If you understand the existential variable in fopl as not addressing reference at all
17:12 < ldlework> therefore giving rise to all the problems of applying fopl to indefinite  reference
17:12 < zipcpi> You just keep asserting that there isn't, but that doesn't explain why all humans is {ro da poi remna}, while all the cities is not {ro da poi *something*}
17:12 < ldlework> and then you say okay
17:12 < ldlework> lojban is not quite fopl
17:12 < ldlework> and its language trying to be fopl
17:12 < ldlework> then *two* fundamental variable types is exceedingly intuitive
17:12 < ldlework> when I predicate upon da based referents, I mean to assert, plainly, predicates upon non-predicate referents
17:13 < dmiles_afk>  *two* fundamental variable types are egain not universal vs existenriall qunatified... they are... ?
17:13 < ldlework> when I predicate upon zo'e referents, I mean to assert, plaining, upon predicates themselves
17:13 < ldlework> I mean to establish an entailment between two predicates, rather than a single predicate and a single referent
17:13 < ldlework> this perfectl explains
17:13 < ldlework> That man is mortal
17:13 < ldlework> and
17:13 < ldlework> Men are mortal
17:13 < ldlework> one creates an entailment one does not
17:13 < ldlework> it makes everything so easy to explain and understand
17:13 < dmiles_afk> (this is sometimes called a-box vs t-box?)
17:13 < zipcpi> There is an entailment; just not in the "A causes B" sense
17:14 < zipcpi> More as a "Something is A and B" sense
17:14 < ldlework> zipcpi: not in any sense that anyone but you uses
17:14 < ldlework> seriously
17:14 < zipcpi> That is also how "All humans are mortal" works. All that are human, are also mortal
17:14 < ldlework> Nope
17:14 < dmiles_afk> (secretly i was wondering if i was goign to discover that a-box vs t-box infernce methods need to be differnt)
17:14 < ldlework> It creates a relationship between two predicates.
17:15 < zipcpi> Says nothing about whether mortality is "in" humanity... seriously, this is why we have gg-lo'i in the first place
17:15 < zipcpi> Or the alternatives {kairpau} and {kai'a}
17:15 < ldlework> I love how your answer to everything isn't a substantial build up of justification
17:15 < ldlework> its just "that's why we have magic article that doesn't advance our ability to apply analytics to natural speech"
17:15 < ldlework> y'know, one of the core goals of the experiment
17:16 < ldlework> I seriously just built up a self-consistent framework that obliges all quirks
17:16 < ldlework> Instead of stepping out of your position
17:16 < ldlework> and just exploring the consequence of what I'm saying
17:16 < ldlework> seeing if the shoe fits
17:16 < zipcpi> No, you want to make {roda} mean {ro da poi co'e}
17:16 < ldlework> its just "no, magic article"
17:16 < ldlework> Its like, in this channel, I never expect everyone to just agree
17:17 < ldlework> but to atleast conceptualize what I'm talking about, explore it on its own foundations, then throw it away
17:17 < ldlework> Rather than, well yes, the big thing you just built up isn't isomorphic with hwere I was trying to go, so you're just making shit up and not talking about anything that's important to lojban.
17:17 < dmiles_afk> i serrously am amzed about this channel.. i been on irc for a long time as sad it's not until today i knew of it's existence
17:17 < bigcentaur> hi dmiles_afk
17:17 < bigcentaur> :)
17:18 < dmiles_afk> i started being interesting lojban arround 1998.. i was afraid it was going to just be interligua (thoughi'd been happy if that was all it was)
17:18 < zipcpi> So "All that I refer to as "cities", is beautiful" says nothing about beauty being "because" I refer to it
17:18 < ldlework> zipcpi: if we conceptualize lojbanic logical expansions in the way I've expressed, that linguists suggest we do (obviate referential predication), 1.you don't need your magic article, 2. nothing about lojban's ability to be logically expanded is lost 2. the ability to apply analytics to lojban becomes easier
17:19 < zipcpi> All it does is restrict what {roda} refers to
17:19 < ldlework> zipcpi: All Men are mortal is not an enumerating referential description in any writing I've read I'm sorry
17:19 < bigcentaur> dmile_afk: nice! i've only been around since oct '14 ha
17:19 < ldlework> Moreso, it falls in to ALL the writing I've read describing some english definite forms as creating indefinite descriptions
17:19 < ldlework> you know why they observe that?
17:19 < bigcentaur> dmiles_afk: nice! i've only been around since oct '14 ha
17:19 < dmiles_afk> but lojban is about building a dialog system in which a computational inner voice can think in?
17:20 < ldlework> Not because its going to make lojban easier to define
17:20 < ldlework> because of the -logical entailment of such statements-
17:20 < ldlework> If you simply create this man je that man je that man je that man je that man
17:20 < ldlework> is mortal
17:20 < zipcpi> Nor does "All men are mortal" say that they are mortal *because* they are men
17:20 < ldlework> you do not create an entailment between humanity and mortality
17:20 < ldlework> you simply say
17:21 < ldlework> each person who happens to be man, also happens to be mortal
17:21 < ldlework> that the predicate morality, happens to be true of all these referents for which the predicate humanity is also true
17:21 < zipcpi> So each thing that happens to be what I refer to as a city, also happens to be beautiful. What's the difference between the logical forms?
17:21 < ldlework> but there might be a man out there we didn't count, or doesn't exist yet, that becomes mortal
17:21 < ldlework> entailment!
17:22 < dmiles_afk> when i worked on SUMO they did not let me add  entails/2
17:22 < ldlework> one *never refers to any man but the predicate is-a-man* then establishes a new truth about that predicate, not its referents, as it pertains to the other predicate mortality
17:22 < ldlework> the other refers and creates no entailment!
17:22 < zipcpi> It creates an entailment between the things you happen to be referring to at the time
17:22 < ldlework> ro da poi remna cu ka'e morsi, merely says, everything that happens to be a man, happens to be mortal
17:22 < ldlework> it does not say that, if you are a man, you must be mortal
17:22 < ldlework> because all you've done is
17:22 < dmiles_afk> when you say ..  entailment  you mean a logical prol,o neck like ":-" ?
17:23 < ldlework> gone to each man and say
17:23 < ldlework> you are human
17:23 < ldlework> you are mortal
17:23 < ldlework> that's it
17:23 < ldlework> such as
17:23 < ldlework> you are tall
17:23 < ldlework> you are hungry
17:23 < ldlework> two things completely not entailed
17:23 < ldlework> you do that for each man
17:23 < ldlework> you create no entailment
17:23 < ldlework> since there may come a day when a tall satiated man is born
17:23 < ldlework> if it were _entailed_
17:23 < zipcpi> My point is that "All the cities are beautiful" are the same, except that you may only be referring to a subset of cities
17:23 < ldlework> no such out come is possible, ever
17:24 < ldlework> that's because you're using the indefinite article
17:24 < ldlework> All _the_ cities
17:24 < ldlework> which is different than
17:24 < ldlework> All cities are beautiful
17:24 < ldlework> it just is, that's how the english works
17:24 < ldlework> And I suggest we solve the problem with not pragmatics
17:24 < ldlework> a very messy and impossible unofrmal study of this problem
17:24 < ldlework> and define definite and indefinite reference as the foundataion from which all our descriptions are derrived!
17:24 < ldlework> you either create assertions on referents
17:24 < zipcpi> The point is that {da} is still being restricted. If you say it isn't you have to say {ro da melbi} makes sense there
17:25 < ldlework> or you create entailment relationshisp
17:25 < ldlework> no
17:25 < ldlework> there is no da
17:25 < ldlework> and there is nothing to quantify
17:25 < ldlework> there is zo'e
17:25 < zipcpi> Outer quantifiers quantify
17:25 < ldlework> that in this case reprersents a predicate
17:25 < zipcpi> It would be {ro le tcadu}
17:25 < ldlework> zipcpi: I believe sometimes you just say things
17:25 < ldlework> words, and phrases that you've heard at similar times in simiar discussions
17:25 < ldlework> without connecting them to what you're saying or what you're replying
17:25 < zipcpi> {ro le tcadu} != {le ro tcadu}
17:26 < ldlework> Yes, and tell us how
17:26 < ldlework> And then
17:26 < ldlework> How it is directly applicable to the point you used this observation to reply to
17:26 < zipcpi> ro le tcadu: All the cities; le ro tcadu: the cities, which number all
17:26 < ldlework> Nope now you're making semantic interpretations
17:26 < ldlework> You're not going to lojban's definition
17:26 < ldlework> And expanding them existentially
17:26 < zipcpi> mu le tcadu: Five of the cities; le mu tcadu: the cities, which numbers five / the five cities
17:26 < ldlework> So you're just making shit up here
17:26 < ldlework> Based on your conceptualization of how reference works in lojban
17:27 < zipcpi> This is how outer quantifiers work vs inner quantifiers
17:27 < zipcpi> If you're just gonna swear at me then there is no point in continuing
17:27 < ldlework> "the 5 of what cities"
17:27 < ldlework> or do you argue there is no default inner quantifier
17:27 < ldlework> and that
17:27 < ldlework> mu le tcadu, actually means something substantially isolate from le mu tcadu
17:28 < ldlework> other than just rearranging your english and declaring "there!"
17:28 < ldlework> expand them
17:28 < ldlework> to fopl
17:28 < ldlework> as all lojban should be able to do
17:28 < ldlework> In neither case are you making an indefinite description like you hope
17:28 < ldlework> You are iterating 5 cities of some larger set, potentially all of them
17:28 < zipcpi> mu da poi le'elkai lo ka tcadu / da poi le'elkai lo ka mumei je lo ka tcadu
17:28 < ldlework> or you're iterating 5 cities
17:28 < ldlework> in both case neither creates an entailment
17:29 < ldlework> such as
17:29 < ldlework> All cities are beautiful
17:29 < ldlework> zipcpi: by expanding to da
17:29 < ldlework> you only get to use da
17:29 < ldlework> you don't get to use your magic particles, sorry
17:29 < ldlework> I can't apply logic to your magic particles
17:29 < ldlework> and therfore cannot conclude anything meaningful from your expansions
17:29 < zipcpi> mu da poi ke'a mi skicu ... whatever
17:30 < ldlework> when you can expand mu lo broda and lo mu broda in a way that doesn't simply enumerate some actual broda and claim something about those broda, but actually establish a new entailment about what it means to broda
17:30 < ldlework> then you will have my ear
17:30 < ldlework> but I *know* you can't do that
17:30 < ldlework> In the same way you can't humm a number.
17:30 < ldlework> You've missed the point.
17:31 < dmiles_afk> hrrm google translate does nto tranlate lojban?
17:31 < zipcpi> Now you want to overturn outer and inner quantifiers as well. I can't follow you there
17:31 < ldlework> zipcpi: don't say things that are obviously false
17:31 < zipcpi> Which one, the first one or the second one
17:32 < ldlework> That I want to overturn outer an inner quantifiers. I'm showing you, that neither inner nor outer quantifiers do what you want them to do
17:32 < ldlework> IE, create entailment between two predicates
17:32 < ldlework> No amount of quantification can create the kind of entailment you'd like. Ever.
17:33 < ldlework> You're either saying something about each individual broda, which may be true but says nothing about brodaness
17:33 < ldlework> Or
17:33 < dmiles_afk> is zipcpi using  quantification to means something synonmous with referants?
17:33 < ldlework> You're saying something about some subset of some larger subset (potentially all broda)
17:33 < ldlework> But never says anything about brodaness
17:33 < zipcpi> You are saying something about each individual thing that you refer to as {le tcadu}
17:33 < ldlework> yes
17:33 < ldlework> exactly
17:33 < ldlework> No matter inner or outer quantification
17:33 < ldlework> neither creates enatialment _as defined_
17:34 < ldlework> not your characterization of me trying to destroy lojban or some bullshit
17:34 < ldlework> or misunderstanding it so badly I wish to redefine it
17:34 < zipcpi> So what's the difference between saying something about each individual thing that {remna}, and saying something about each individual thing that {me le tcadu}, however you want to define {le}?
17:34 < ldlework> zipcpi: Either to be human is to be mortal.
17:34 < ldlework> Or merely, each man that exists today is mortal.
17:34 < ldlework> You get one.
17:34 < ldlework> Pick.
17:35 < zipcpi> The second, except nothing about tense is specified
17:35 < ldlework> That doesn't matter
17:35 < ldlework> There could be a man right now that is not mortal that you didn't count
17:35 < ldlework> because you did not entail that maness is mortal
17:35 < ldlework> you merely went to each one and told them
17:35 < ldlework> you are tall
17:35 < ldlework> you are hungry
17:35 < ldlework> no where did you establish that tallness entails hunger
17:35 < ldlework> and never will you with this strategy
17:36 < ldlework> I have to assume you don't mean that man-ness entails mortal-ness because that's not what you said
17:36 < zipcpi> And I don't. That is dealt with {nibli} or {kairpau} or whatever
17:36 < ldlework> You implied it statistically which is different.
17:36 < ldlework> zipcpi: right the only way it is nibli
17:36 < ldlework> is if we entail
17:36 < ldlework> IE we say
17:36 < ldlework> All men are mortal.
17:36 < ldlework> Where "All men"
17:37 < ldlework> isn't "ro da poi remna"
17:37 < ldlework> but some construct lojban doesn't support yet
17:37 < ldlework> IE indefinite descriptions
17:37 < ldlework> that allow us to express entailment between predicates, directly.
17:38 < ldlework> I want a lojban that affords me both.
17:38 < ldlework> In a way that both are core features of my utilization of that language
17:38 < ldlework> not wrapped up in some external preidcate
17:38 < dmiles_afk> by practicing logban practically.. was it discovered there were parts of logic that had been seemingly neglated to be taught in school but were probably very important?
17:38 < ldlework> favoring one description type over the other
17:39 < zipcpi> dmiles: I'm not sure I'm the right person to ask
17:39 < dmiles_afk> (i am wondering if those are practicalities that ldlework and zipcpi are hashing out)
17:39 < zipcpi> Nah
17:39 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: my overall lesson is that lojban conflated somethings that exist in fopl as tools of language, and fopl and language are so nearly related that we will never be able to illuminate the important distinctions
17:39 < ldlework> such as reference and existential variables
17:39 < ldlework> Where existential variables exist to allow us to relate predicates (not refer)
17:40 < ldlework> And references allow us to apply predicates to actual things, not create propositional entailments (to actually refer)
17:41 < dmiles_afk> i wonder if the logicans that is using a machine like CYC is actualyl using more than one variable type (and he didnt know it)
17:41 < ldlework> Except for in the cases where the form of the statement is existential itself, where-in other actual language philosphers say in english the definite form is abused to create indefinite descriptions sometimes, where-in I argue, being lojban we should just distingusih it as explicitly as possible, at the level where it is concerned
17:42 < dmiles_afk> ok your answer wass yes
17:42 < dmiles_afk> oops you meant the english speaker
17:42 < ldlework> When I say "My friend is human. Some philosophers say to be a man is to be mortal. I conclude my friend is mortal.
17:42 < dmiles_afk> i think logicains do tthose same evils in fopl sometimes
17:42 < ldlework> There are several levels going on
17:43 < ldlework> There is the logical structure of my actual utterance, IE, the propositions I used to formluate my speech.
17:43 < ldlework> There is the illocutionary acts performed by that which is not propositional content in my speech.
17:43 < dmiles_afk> same evils  =   definite form  vs indefinate forms .. even in fopl
17:43 < ldlework> Then there is the logical structure of the claims inside the propositional content of my speech.
17:43 < ldlework> Its like
17:44 < ldlework> We just don't care to ever reveal that perhaps, you can't encompass language with the facilities of fopl.
17:44 < ldlework> IE, you can't take what consititutes fopl, give each thing a new "language-y meaning/purpose" and then call this new interpretation of fopl, "a logical lanaguage"
17:45 < ldlework> That instead, language is far more complex than fopl, that you must first create a language, and consider the results from the pearch an of informed logical history
17:45 < ldlework> That abusing existential variables, which allow us to denote that which preidcates share, as the same thing as a referring description, is so inherent to our understanding is ... well I didn't meant to characterize that observation as something, just to make the observation
17:45 < ldlework> it exists.
17:46 < ldlework> But its wrong
17:46 < dmiles_afk> (secretly i think logicans are *dialoging* with folp .. sometimes trying to redfine its very nature.. yet it can happen something by accident)
17:46 < ldlework> And leads many people to say "You can't say that, that's false"
17:46 < ldlework> Or similiar strangeness.
17:46 < ldlework> Of varying forms.
17:46 < dmiles_afk> (are *dialoging* with folp implemntaiton designed by the greeks)
17:47 < ldlework> Yeah that's just not possible outside of saying speech in the indefinite.
17:47 < ldlework> But that's all that logicians are interested in.
17:47 < ldlework> So it makes perfect sense to me.
17:49 < dmiles_afk> defiantley this is really opening up my mind :)
17:49 < latro`a> unfortunately I've seen a lot of places where we abuse existential variables and in the process *lose* understanding, especially in mathematics
17:50 < latro`a> and not just in mathematics where logic is the focus; real analysis is the main place I have in mind
17:50 < dmiles_afk> when a logician "authors" a logic statemnt   "a(X) => b(X) & c(X,Y) & d(Y). "
17:50 < dmiles_afk> they are creating "if a(X) was proven to be true, then this  d(Y) is true at least when i have framed (and logically (and can legally) produce) the other things like b(X) where c(X,Y) are what i meant to relate them"
17:51 < dmiles_afk>  "futher i would like that a(X) implies b(X) .. but only if you havent already refuted c(X,Y) and d(Y)"
17:51 < latro`a> relatedly, shadowing local variables creates lots of confusion outside of relatively trivial contexts
17:52 < dmiles_afk>  "i want not b(X) to be entailed by not c(X,_). "
17:52 < latro`a> this is part of the struggle of getting a student to first grasp algebra; "but you just said x=6, how can you now have x=4?"
17:52 < dmiles_afk> "i want not b(X) to be entailed by not c(X,_).   but only when a(X) is proven"
17:53 < dmiles_afk> "oops not c(X,Y).  is only solvable when we have a legitimate d(Y). "
17:54 < dmiles_afk> "we can skip a legitimate d(Y). though if we for sure have a legitimate a(X)"
17:55 < dmiles_afk> " a(X) (that is any refernt)  can only be  legitimized if we feel confidant we can  legitimatize d(Y). even without the presence of referrents"
17:56 < latro`a> one instance of this problem: in analysis you often want to take an error and split it up into pieces, where you have a way of guaranteeing that the pieces separately can be made arbitrarily small. so sometimes you wind up proving something like "for every epsilon ... the error is less than 3 epsilon", when what you wanted to prove was "for every epsilon ... the error is less than epsilon"
17:57 < dmiles_afk> (in essence i am saying i am sttarting to think that quantification and referancy are differnt even in Fopl !)
17:58 < dmiles_afk> (i have always pretended quantification and referancy were the same in fopl)
17:58 < latro`a> not really, but this issue is part of why building set theory in first order logic is hard
18:00 < dmiles_afk> well this is helping me undersand te changes i mayneed to make in my fopl to prolog code translator
18:02 < ldlework> zipcpi that thing I said about you saying stuff that doesn't connect was bullshit I shouldn't have said that nor do I believe it
18:02 < ldlework> I'm sorry about that.
18:03 < dmiles_afk> perhaps if i added more wrappings on the outside of fopl to add veriabel liek  (all ?QUERY (thereExist ?PROP (thereExist ?WORLD (implies (in ?WORLD ?QUERY) ?PROP))))
18:04 < dmiles_afk> (that is adorning exome extra variables to be present durring normal for transitions)
18:04 < dmiles_afk> (to be present durring normal form transitions)
18:05 < dmiles_afk> for exmaple..   i used to when translating NL to logic..  I *had* to add in the ?SPEAKER  ?ADRESSEE
18:06 < dmiles_afk> or else many statment like  "Hello friend"  was not translateble to fopl
18:07 < ldlework> I don't think fopl statements really refer 9r even speak about the real world or imagined, in that the formalization that includes "there exists" has anything to do with asserting that anything exists except a variable that will allow us to denote predicate relationships
18:07 < dmiles_afk> even "All 5 cities are beautiful"   i can only translate when i know the ?SPEAKER
18:08 < ldlework> anything else is abuse
18:08 < dmiles_afk> (logically i agree with you ldlework)
18:09 < dmiles_afk> oh sorry yes i was leaving out the preds.. naughty me
18:11 < ldlework> after all you can take any fopl statements and replace all the predicates with nonce predicates and still do fopl!
18:14 < ldlework> it truly is a calculus for proving certain things about an abstract network of dependency and entailment. we just often use predicates from the real world but that's not a requirement at all
18:15 < dmiles_afk> one new trick ii plan to test is: to convert   (love joe sally)    ==>   (exists ?pred (exists ?arg1  (exists ?arg2 (implies (and (refersToAs ?world ?pred loves) (refersToAs ?world ?arg1 joe) (refersToAs ?world  ?arg1 joe) ) (and (imagined-now ?world (?pred ?arg1 ?arg2))))))
18:15 < ldlework> Lol I can't parse that on my phone
18:16 < dmiles_afk> nrlaly we mihgt assert:  (love joe sally)
18:16 < dmiles_afk> normally
18:16 < ldlework> is this using rpn?
18:16 < dmiles_afk> CYC
18:16 < ldlework> dunno what that is
18:17  * dmiles_afk checks ot see if its compatable withj rpm
18:17 < dmiles_afk> rpn
18:17 < ldlework> I just mean where the operator comes first
18:17 < dmiles_afk> oh yes
18:17 < ldlework> ie, is love the predicate?
18:17 < ldlework> oh OK
18:17 < dmiles_afk> right prefixed all operator
18:17 < ldlework> I guessed "reverse polish notation"
18:18 < dmiles_afk> so ..   (implies (and (refersToAs ?world ?pred loves) (refersToAs ?world ?arg1 joe) (refersToAs ?world  ?arg1 joe) ) (and (imagined-now ?world (?pred ?arg1 ?arg2)))))
18:18 < dmiles_afk> oops i messsed sally there
18:19 < ldlework> heh you should start by building your grammar so we know what you mean by it
18:19 < dmiles_afk> i also imple a precial predicate (i left out per arg places)
18:20 < dmiles_afk> (i left out per arg place there is one implicit arity one predicate!)
18:20 < uuZIT> Holy shit, Idlework, did you just talk for 7 hours straight? o_O
18:22 < dmiles_afk> (loves joe sally)  is actualyl 4 statments  "it is now poissiklbe for joe to love someone"  "sally is lovable"  "loves is a predicate" and  "joe loves sally"
18:22 < ldlework> it's a difficult subject
18:23 < dmiles_afk> if i use (loves joe sally) in a anteceedant i say that all 4 statemtns have to be true
18:23 < dmiles_afk> this means my CNF must see all 4 litterals
18:24 < dmiles_afk> and conversion to Horn clause entailments must be aware of all 4
18:25 < dmiles_afk> if i use negation (i havfe to durring refutation strategy) not all 4 statemtns are based on the same type of logic
18:25 < dmiles_afk> "it is now possiklbe for joe to love someone"  is modal logic
18:25 < ldlework> I
18:25 < ldlework> ii
18:26 < dmiles_afk> "not all 4 statemtns are based on the same type of logic" <- ignore that since that is a side trip :)
18:28 < dmiles_afk> what i am saying i am starting to be aware of is that producing logical entialment (that is so i can answer queries and prove antecedancts) is based on many factors that i wasnt told were part of logic
18:29 < dmiles_afk> that is based on the process of almost having a diolog with an infernce engine
18:29 < dmiles_afk> that starts to become as nasty as english
18:30 < dmiles_afk> only because i forget that is what is going on
18:30 < dmiles_afk> (as the logician)
18:31 < dmiles_afk> as the implemntor of the logical infernce engine .. i almost have to guess at what the logican meant.. even though they think they areusing plain simple fopl
18:32 < dmiles_afk> i have to see them as they add logical statements as interatively builing up a world
18:32 < dmiles_afk> iteratively*
18:33 < dmiles_afk> oops i meant incrementally
18:34 < dmiles_afk> 1/2 way thru the dialog (i dont get a measure of what 1/2 way is)  but i know they are gojng to be underspecific... and all the way they thru they are thinking they are fully specicific
18:35 < dmiles_afk> at the end of this.. they will still have been grossly nderspefic to the meanings of mortals and humans
18:35 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: you're building an inference engine?!
18:35 < dmiles_afk> later on they will tell that being mortals means dying one day
18:36 < dmiles_afk> (but before they told us that we have to accept that we have enough to start proving things tfor them)
18:36 < dmiles_afk> ldlework: yes
18:36 < dmiles_afk> i keep trying to revise the impl to make it work!
18:37 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: what is it implemented in?
18:37 < dmiles_afk> Prolog
18:37 < ldlework> feck
18:37 < dmiles_afk> it started out in 1999 with Mark Stickel's PTTP
18:38 < dmiles_afk> which is the fist and only sound and compete reasoniner i have found in 15 years!
18:38 < dmiles_afk> (though CYC almost counts)
18:39 < dmiles_afk> but even to pureness of PTTP chokes on our world
18:39 < dmiles_afk> becasue we cant communicate or logic sometimes
18:39 < dmiles_afk> well that was a lie.. sorry
18:40 < dmiles_afk> i feel like we have been able to oversikmlify our logic
18:40 < dmiles_afk> i dont know who's fault it is
18:41 < dmiles_afk> i am just saying plain old mathmatical logic seem to be hard.. when it should be the only thing not difficult
18:41 < dmiles_afk> i cant even blame people
18:41 < dmiles_afk> (sorry to keep saying "i")
18:41 < ldlework> Probably because most logic, that takes place within us, takes place under our nose so to speak
18:43 < ldlework> IE, it is the exception that we stop to actually think about logic directly. We're otherwise pretty intuitive creatures, from our standpoint anyway. The brain is probably doing all sorts of sophisticated stuff :)
18:43 < dmiles_afk> i didnt want to design the language for my infenrce ingine i so borrowed Cycorps lanuage CycL
18:44 < dmiles_afk> CycL (and maybe logban)( are the only two semicomplete logical languages that i know of
18:45 < dmiles_afk> Cyc is the program in 1999 i was supposed to implment in Prolog
18:45 < ldlework> I think an inference engine would have to do exactly what we do honestly
18:45 < dmiles_afk> i took a 10 year break and now in the last year working on it again
18:45 < ldlework> It would have to separate the reference act from the propositional act
18:45 < dmiles_afk> ahah.. now you saying things i need to hear!
18:46 < ldlework> If I say "A ball is blue." "The gift is very important to me."
18:46 < ldlework> How can you inference engine do *anything* with real speech unless it does exactly that?
18:46 < ldlework> When it encounters "the gift" what will it do?
18:47 < ldlework> Will it try to create conclusions based on the other things here which are some how logically related to giftness?
18:47 < ldlework> Or will it simply attempt to assign the description to some external object?
18:47 < ldlework> Like the one introduced in the first sentence?
18:47 < dmiles_afk> "How can you inference engine do *anything* with real speech unless it does exactly that?"  <- for sure!   but maybe this is true?  "How can you inference engine do *anything* with First Order Predicate Logic unless it does exactly that?"
18:47 < ldlework> With reference as a separate speech act, the inference engine will have to pick something in context.
18:48 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: well
18:48 < ldlework> You can treat all speech as non-veridical
18:48 < ldlework> And interpret
18:48 < ldlework> "The gift is very important to me"
18:48 < ldlework> as relating the predicates "important" and "giftness"
18:48 < ldlework> But I'd say you are wasting your time since that's now how speech works
18:48 < ldlework> But probably the direction most would have you go in.
18:49 < ldlework> sorry, "You can treat all speech as veridical*"
18:49 < ldlework> Actually
18:50 < ldlework> Even veridical definite descriptions have no bearing on the core proposition
18:50 < ldlework> Its just a totally unrelated assertion made in addition to the main one
18:51 < ldlework> Unless the goal is to characterize
18:51 < ldlework> And the information that x was a Ball in addition to being Blue is going to somehow lead you to conclusions that depend on *characterizing* balls.
18:51 < ldlework> In that your inference engine might conclude, well the only ball I've ever encountered was blue, so maybe all balls are blue?
18:52 < ldlework> But seriously, this isn't the purview of fopl
18:52 < dmiles_afk> (*nod*)
18:52 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: but it might be the purview of inference engines
18:53 < ldlework> for sets of inference engines that you don't care it is wrong, as long as it makes an educated guess
18:53 < ldlework> IE, using characterizations
18:53 < ldlework> Its interesting to me to think of characterization in this way
18:54 < ldlework> For example if I say
18:54 < ldlework> My dad is a great guy.
18:54 < ldlework> You're supposed to understand that there is someone out there that is a great guy.
18:54 < ldlework> And use "My dad" to figure out which one
18:54 < ldlework> The description and the eventual proposition are not supposed to meet.
18:54 < ldlework> But what do we do when we make characterizations?
18:55 < ldlework> Well ldlework's dad is awesome, and this guy is your dad, so maybe your dad is awesome.
18:55 < ldlework> Instead of attributing the assertion to just the referent, the guy, who happens to be my dad.
18:55 < ldlework> You're attributing the assertion to the description.
18:55 < ldlework> But this perfectly aligns with the thinking that indefinite descriptions refer to predicates.
18:56 < ldlework> Because if I remove the relativization
18:56 < ldlework> Dads are awesome.
18:56 < ldlework> I get the characterization, the generalization
18:56 < ldlework> Its not only wrong to ignore the reference act as separate than the propositional one, it leads to bad thinking.
18:57 < ldlework> I wonder if it can be formalized to
18:57 < ldlework> Anytime the perlocutionary effect is the application of a root predicate to the description rather than the referent, you get a generlization.
18:58 < ldlework> This makes sense if we model our understanding of indefinite descriptions as having no referent.
18:58 < ldlework> Or referring to predicates themselves.
18:58 < dmiles_afk> (all this is true of FOPL you thi9nk .. not just English .. correcT?)
18:59 < ldlework> no
18:59 < dmiles_afk> (i am interested in understand english to)
18:59 < ldlework> I don't believe reference is a thing that takes place in fopl at all
19:00 < ldlework> the variables used in fopl are only useful for the calculus, to objectify the relationship between two predicates
19:00 < dmiles_afk> ok .. right that just transation of speech when you say refernce
19:00 < ldlework> but fopl variables don't nessecitate that they actually refer to anything
19:00 < ldlework> they just represent the connection between men and mortal
19:00 < ldlework> they don't represent men or mortals
19:00 < dmiles_afk> ah!
19:01 < ldlework> There exists should be rephrased
19:01 < dmiles_afk> (see secretly I use the vars to pass arround referants)
19:01 < ldlework> If there ever was such a thing,
19:01 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: okay let me explain
19:01 < ldlework> in lojban we have a grammar for producing fopl statements trivially
19:01 < ldlework> for example
19:01 < ldlework> da represents the existential variable x in fopl (let's say)
19:02 < ldlework> so instead of
19:02 < ldlework> F(x)
19:02 < ldlework> I can just say
19:02 < ldlework> x froda
19:02 < ldlework> the structure is
19:02 < ldlework> 1 predicate 2 3 4 5
19:02 < ldlework> so if we had another variable
19:02 < bigcentaur> .i .u'i do'o za'o casnu zo'e
19:02 < ldlework> we'd put it after the predicate
19:02 < ldlework> so if we wanted
19:02 < ldlework> F(x, y)
19:02 < ldlework> we might say
19:02 < ldlework> da froda de
19:03 < ldlework> make sense so far?
19:03 < dmiles_afk> so far .. with you
19:03 < ldlework> if I wanted to create an entailment between two predicates
19:03 < ldlework> I can do
19:04 < ldlework> da zo'u gajanai da remna gi da kamymorsi
19:04 < ldlework> For x, if x is human, then, x is mortal
19:05 < ldlework> traditionally you would formulate this as
19:05 < dmiles_afk> (implies (human ?X) (mortal ?X))
19:05 < dmiles_afk> (how i write it in fopl)
19:06 < ldlework> ro da poi remna ku'o kamymorsi
19:06 < ldlework> which says
19:06 < ldlework> for all x which is human, is mortal
19:06 < ldlework> here's where the conflation happens
19:07 < ldlework> in fopl speak, when we say "for all x if A then B" all we mean to do, is establish, or denote an entailment between A and B
19:07 < ldlework> but in -language- when we say "for all x" we _refer_ to things we then assert things about.
19:08 < ldlework> This is bad, because in the goal of fopl we wish to explore the relationships between predicates
19:08 < ldlework> In language we wish to explore the nature of individual things and their characteristics.
19:08 < ldlework> Notice that in the language, we don't get the entailment nessecarilly.
19:09 < ldlework> For every human that human is mortal.
19:09 < ldlework> All this really does
19:09 < ldlework> Is line up a bunch of objects in the world into a line
19:09 < ldlework> and then visits each object placed in the line
19:09 < ldlework> and says
19:09 < ldlework> "Hello, you are a human. You are also mortal."
19:09 < ldlework> It does this for every human, until the line is exhausted.
19:10 < ldlework> The only entailment created is *statistical*
19:10 < ldlework> "Well since all the humans are mortals, then, *probably* to be human, implies mortality."
19:10 < ldlework> fopl does something else entirely
19:10 < ldlework> it says, for M(x) to be true, then H(x) must also be true
19:11 < ldlework> It creates logical entailment between the definition of the predicates.
19:11 < dmiles_afk> still following
19:11 < ldlework> Regardless if there are no humans anywhere, at anytime, and Human and Mortal are fake predicates we just made up and don't mean anything.
19:12 < ldlework> I argue (really, I'm parroting) that when we state things, in language, we really care to assert predicates upon our referents.
19:13 < ldlework> When I say, "The hostess is nice." I don't mean to create any entailment between host and nice.
19:13 < ldlework> I do wish to assert niceness upon the person to whom I refer.
19:13 < ldlework> In fact, no entailment between niceness and host-ness could ever be useful
19:13 < ldlework> Except for a generalization
19:13 < ldlework> And if that's what I really meant to do
19:14 < uuZITxirel> Whaaat? 8 hours and still talking? You're insane. ;-) Anyways, I say good-bye to all.
19:14 < ldlework> As a speaker that's what I would do
19:14 < uuZITxirel> co'oroda
19:14 < ldlework> I would create that entailment
19:14 < ldlework> via
19:14 < ldlework> Hosts are nice.
19:14 < dmiles_afk> (peek at this ..  https://github.com/TeamSPoon/PrologMUD/wiki/E2C )   are the statements after the words entailmnets?
19:15 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: Are you creating a relationship between what it means to be a shopper and what it means to drink?
19:15 < ldlework> Or are you imbuing a specific drinker with some quality of drinking-ness?
19:15 < ldlework> I argue it is obviously the latter
19:15 < dmiles_afk> 2nd
19:16 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: now what if it was an indefinite description?
19:16 < dmiles_afk> dang i was hoping i had an exmaple of that
19:16 < ldlework> Shoppers drink the pepsi?
19:16 < dmiles_afk> (none of those on that page are!)
19:16 < ldlework> Now we are creating an entailment between what it means to be a shopper and to drink
19:17 < ldlework> It even seems strange to us, to have a whole class of things drinking the same definite referent of the description "the pepsi"
19:17 < ldlework> as if to be a shopper you must share the great single can of pepsi
19:17 < ldlework> or that our speaker is russian
19:17 < ldlework> an included the definite article on the indefinite description "Pepsi"
19:18 < ldlework> "Shoppers drink Pepsi"
19:18 < ldlework> Even though it is false, it no longer seems strange.
19:18 < dmiles_afk> (implies (shopper ?x) (pepsiDrinker ?x))
19:18 < dmiles_afk> is  (implies (shopper ?x) (pepsiDrinker ?x))   an entailmnet?
19:18 < ldlework> It seems strange in the first case because since the first description is indefinite, we refer not a or some or all the shoppers
19:18 < ldlework> but to the predicate to-shop itself
19:19 < ldlework> so we seem to define the very act of shopping in regards to drinking a single pepsi
19:19 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: I don't know youammar so I can't tell what's definite and what's indefinite
19:19 < ldlework> your grammar
19:20 < dmiles_afk> "All shoppers drink pepsi sometimes"    ->    (implies (shopper ?x) (pepsiDrinker ?x))
19:20 < ldlework> well
19:20 < ldlework> remember
19:20 < ldlework> All shoppers isn't always the same as "Shoppers"
19:20 < ldlework> Just like if we tell each human that they are mortal
19:20 < ldlework> We haven't created a relationship between men and mortality
19:20 < ldlework> beyond the statistical
19:20 < dmiles_afk> "shoppers drink pepsi sometimes"    ->    (implies (shopper ?x) (pepsiDrinker ?x))
19:21 < ldlework> so we should denote explicitly when we mean indefinite and definite
19:21 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: what's the definite form?
19:21 < dmiles_afk> "a  shopper drinks pepsi sometimes"    ->   (exists ?x (implies (shopper ?x) (pepsiDrinker ?x)) )
19:22 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: and the indefinite-with-definite form?
19:22 < dmiles_afk> whats the english of indefinite-with-definite form?
19:23 < ldlework> Shoppers drink the Pepsi.
19:24 < ldlework> I feel like you're making the same conflation
19:24 < ldlework> what is the ?x in (shopper ?x) in the purely indefinite form?
19:24 < ldlework> the predicate "shopper"
19:24 < ldlework> then what's the point?
19:25 < ldlework> You need to different forms of reference.
19:25 < ldlework> You need existential statements, and you need characterizing statements.
19:25 < ldlework> And english is going to give you nothing but trouble
19:25 < ldlework> Because some indefinite forms are definite.
19:25 < ldlework> And some definite forms are indefinite.
19:26 < ldlework> Lojban has the problem that it is trying to solve indefinite reference with quantification.
19:26 < ldlework> Rather than a denoting article
19:26 < dmiles_afk> (existsExistsAtLeast (2 ?x) (implies (shopper ?x) (   (and (isa ?drink DrinkingEvent ) (doer ?x ?drink) (objectConsumed ?y ?pepsi) (pepsi ?pepsi)))
19:26 < ldlework> Like in english
19:26 < ldlework> Aha, you are going to solve it with quantification also I see.
19:26  * dmiles_afk is a slow typer
19:26 < dmiles_afk> right
19:26 < ldlework> In my opinion, all you've created is statistical implication, not logical entailment.
19:27 < dmiles_afk> but i am worried that one size quatification solution is worng maybe
19:27 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: well of course it is
19:27 < ldlework> how do you accomplish the two following goals:
19:27 < ldlework> entailing that humanity is inherently mortal by way of definitional entailment
19:28 < ldlework> or merely observing that each human is also mortal without asserting entailment beyond the statististical
19:28 < dmiles_afk> ok .. good question! lets see
19:28 < dmiles_afk> how do we encode the difernc3e in fopl ?
19:28 < ldlework> it doesn't exist.
19:28 < ldlework> this is my point
19:29 < dmiles_afk> so there are things that fopl cant represent?
19:29 < dmiles_afk> (secretly i am under the assumption that anything under the sun can be written in fopl)
19:29 < ldlework> No, fopl can express reference but not in the sense that you can just abuse a mechanic of fopl, the existential variable, actually talk about referents.
19:30 < ldlework> You must predicate reference, as any other predicate
19:30 < ldlework> when you wish to encodify what someone said and how they said it
19:30 < ldlework> Because the existential variable is not isomorphic with those things we use descriptions to refer
19:30 < ldlework> When I say
19:30 < ldlework> My dad is nice
19:30 < ldlework> the predicate "dad" never shows up in fopl
19:31 < ldlework> because the proposition here has nothing to do with dads and how they relate to niceness
19:31 < ldlework> it has to do with *some guy* being nice.
19:31 < ldlework> all we get from the fopl in this case is
19:31 < ldlework> Nice(x)
19:31 < ldlework> that's it!
19:31 < dmiles_afk> we also relate that guy to dadness and who's dad it is
19:31 < ldlework> But that's not the content of the proposition
19:31 < ldlework> I'm not asserting that something is a dad
19:31 < ldlework> I'm asserting something is nice
19:32 < ldlework> "My dad" is a referring expression, so that in the context of language and communication, you know what is nice.
19:32 < ldlework> But if we start to conflate the existential variable, with /that guy/
19:32 < ldlework> Then we start to create entailments between dad-ness and nice-ness
19:32 < ldlework> Beyond the statistical!
19:32 < dmiles_afk> in fo i do that as   (and (nice ?dad) (fatherOf me ?dad))
19:32 < ldlework> Certainly there are non-nice dads.
19:33 < ldlework> Right, but
19:33 < ldlework> If your goal is to understand the truth of the statement
19:33 < dmiles_afk> or  (exists ?dad (and (nice ?dad) (fatherOf me ?dad)))
19:33 < ldlework> the truth with depends on the referents, and the predicate nice
19:33 < ldlework> but not of dad
19:33 < ldlework> can you see that?
19:33 < dmiles_afk> "goal is to understand the truth of the statement"     (query (and (nice ?dad) (fatherOf me ?dad)))
19:33 < ldlework> it depends on whether /that guy/ is nice. the predicate "dad" never even comes into play
19:34 < dmiles_afk> result is..   ?dad =  ldleworkDad
19:34 < ldlework> I don't understand your grammar, sorry
19:34 < ldlework> But you should be able to agree or disagree without it I think
19:35 < ldlework> Take for example
19:35 < ldlework> We want to teach your bot about dad-ness
19:35 < ldlework> And we want it to arrive at the most platonic understanding of dad-ness possible
19:35 < ldlework> Not our personal favorite idealness, but the ideal that encompasses all instances for which we would say is true of the predicate dad
19:36 < ldlework> IE, niceness and terribleness are both equally valid
19:36 < ldlework> And to teach your bot, it must consume natural speech
19:36 < ldlework> Your bot will have two goals of course
19:36 < ldlework> 1. To know what I mean by what I say to it
19:36 < ldlework> 2. To take some statements as providing additional definition for what the predicate to-dad means
19:36 < ldlework> Now, if you don't carefully divorce these two goals
19:37 < ldlework> You will end up learning many many things about dad-ness for which many dads will prove false under your eventaul learned model
19:37 < ldlework> For example
19:37 < ldlework> My dad is nice
19:37 < ldlework> He plays the baritone
19:37 < ldlework> My dad and Jeremy's get along together
19:37 < ldlework> I wish all dads could spend unlimited time with their kids
19:38 < ldlework> Once troy's wife gives birth, he's going to be a great father
19:38 < ldlework> and so on
19:38 < dmiles_afk> right i have to know so much to understand dadness
19:38 < ldlework> well more importantly
19:38 < ldlework> a lot of this information is irrelvant to dadness
19:38 < ldlework> In most cases
19:38 < ldlework> dad appears in a description clause
19:39 < dmiles_afk> http://logicmoo.org:3602/cgi-bin/cg?cb-c-all-asserted-knowledge&c5501    1000+ statments about Dad..  yes not sure if the robot undersands dad-ness yet
19:39 < ldlework> in most cases it does NOT appear as the core predicating phrase
19:39 < ldlework> do understand what I mean?
19:39 < dmiles_afk> i think you saying that dadness needs defining in fopl ?
19:39 < ldlework> no I'm saying
19:40 < ldlework> when I use the predicate "dad" inside of a referring description
19:40 < ldlework> the larger proposition does not help you understand what it means to be a dad
19:40 < ldlework> IE compare
19:40 < ldlework> My dad is nice.
19:40 < dmiles_afk> oh anaphoric resolution
19:40 < ldlework> All Dads have had sex.
19:40 < ldlework> or rather to be clear
19:40 < ldlework> Dads have had sex.
19:41 < ldlework> So you don't think I'm making an enumerating definite reference
19:41 < ldlework> In the first, we can't learn anything about dad-ness
19:41 < dmiles_afk> to the collection of all dads yeah
19:41 < ldlework> Some guy is a dad, and Some guy is nice
19:41 < dmiles_afk> buty not to a individual dad
19:41 < ldlework> But that doesn't tell us anything about what it means to dad.
19:41 < ldlework> Its not the collection of all dads.
19:41 < ldlework> All dads could be nice.
19:41 < ldlework> But that may not be what it _means to dad_
19:42 < dmiles_afk> All Dads have had sex which produced a child.
19:43 < ldlework> Don't use All
19:43 < ldlework> It means that you're thinking about specific dads
19:43 < dmiles_afk> Dads have had sex which produced a child.
19:43 < ldlework> in this case all of them
19:43 < ldlework> yes
19:43 < dmiles_afk> still may not be what it _means to dad_  :)
19:43 < ldlework> now we're using the predicate it self
19:43 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: sure, but there we can make reasonable disagreements
19:43 < ldlework> but we wont have a reasonable disagreement is one of my axioms is that "well, shit, MY dad is nice"
19:43 < ldlework> So
19:43 < ldlework> to go back
19:44 < ldlework> definite descriptions do not provide definitional predicatory extension in the same way that indefinite descriptions do and definitional statements do
19:44 < ldlework> My dad is cool. There's no need to include the description in the fopl statement.
19:45 < ldlework> Only if you care to understand what it means to be _my dad_
19:45 < ldlework> Further
19:45 < ldlework> the assertion is /some guy/ is cool
19:45 < ldlework> and the truth of this statement depends on whether this guy is cool
19:45 < zipcpi> exp: ko'a soi racli se'u krinu ko'e
19:45 < mensi> ([ko'a {soi <CU (¹racli VAU¹)> se'u}] [CU {krinu <ko'e VAU>}])
19:45 < ldlework> and not whether he's my dad
19:45 < zipcpi> exp: ko'a soi racli cu krinu ko'e
19:45 < mensi> ([ko'a {soi <CU (¹racli VAU¹)> SEhU}] [cu {krinu <ko'e VAU>}])
19:47 < ldlework> I think that language is far more complex than the trivial way we translate it to fopl statements.
19:47 < ldlework> I think that with an inference engine you have to start breaking down speech in terms of language, *then* fopl
19:47 < ldlework> Because any given statement tells you multiple things
19:48 < ldlework> You may have to track multiple completely separate lessons from any given statement.
19:48 < dmiles_afk> ldlework: Oh.. my infernce engine doesnt use english :)   I have to talk to it in  fopl
19:48 < ldlework> If you only care to use the machine to learn the true meaning of predicates, you have to filter some parts of language.
19:48 < ldlework> If you don't really care what it means to dad in the universal sense but want to learn about actual things, like _my dad_, then you have to filter others.
19:48 < zipcpi> .i fabu soi racli cu krinu lo nu da zenba lo ka birti febu <-- Another proposed def for {indika}
19:49 < ldlework> If you just say, any given utterance in any given language, is just some singular self-coherent fopl expression
19:49 < ldlework> I feel that will always be a bot that never gets finished
19:49 < zipcpi> x1 is a rational reason for someone to be more certain of x2
19:49 < ldlework> For example
19:49 < ldlework> My dad is cool.
19:50 < ldlework> zipcpi: why is it rational
19:50 < ldlework> its their opinon?
19:50 < zipcpi> No, because the probability of something, with this new piece of knowledge, is higher than without that knowledge
19:51 < dmiles_afk> when i talk to my bot.. it only use fopl  (if i want to speak engish it has to translate)
19:51 < ldlework> What determines the probability of any given event?
19:51 < ldlework> How do I use pieces of knowledge to derrive such a value?
19:51 < dmiles_afk> to say  My dad is cool ?
19:52 < zipcpi> I'm not studied enough to argue Bayesian mechanics
19:52 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: no sorry, talking to zipcpi
19:52 < ldlework> The Bayesian interpretation of probability can be seen as an extension of propositional logic that enables reasoning with hypotheses, i.e., the propositions whose truth or falsity is uncertain.
19:53  * ldlework coughs quietly.
19:55 < dmiles_afk> " I feel that will always be a bot that never gets finished"   <- it never is finished.   FOPL is alwasy a rough geenralization
19:55 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: I don't see why it has to be
19:55 < dmiles_afk> when i am speaking to it in FOPL.. it knows 30 seconds lkater i might say something else
19:56 < ldlework> We just need better mechanisms for translating speech into fopl and I don't think it is like how we are doing it right now. Or at least as I've seen it in the lojban community and peripherally in studying lojban.
19:56 < dmiles_afk> "i see you"  produces 15 differnt FOPL assertions
19:56 < dmiles_afk> "bill loves sally" makes 4 fopl assertions
19:56 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: I do like that you're digging further than the surface assertion
19:57 < ldlework> I like that you derrive things like "You are visible" from "I see you"
19:57 < ldlework> And probably depends on no other knowledge
19:57 < dmiles_afk> to me when i am in the REPL with a theorem prover i pretend i am having a dialog
19:57 < ldlework> Just the fact that its being use as the object in that predicate
19:58 < dmiles_afk> ah yeah that i see as a builtin part of fopl .. is well formedness
19:58 < ldlework> But there's only so much you can glean right?
19:58 < dmiles_afk> well-formedness means that we assign malness to your father
19:59 < dmiles_afk> maleness
19:59 < ldlework> Like you can't glean that dad-ness is defined in terms of niceness, right?
19:59 < dmiles_afk> i can glean has a level of meaness vs niceness
19:59 < ldlework> did you skip a word? ^
19:59 < dmiles_afk> and is capable of actions
19:59 < ldlework> what?
20:00 < dmiles_afk> "my dad is nice"
20:00 < ldlework> right
20:01 < dmiles_afk> i can glean that its possible
20:01 < ldlework> what is
20:01 < dmiles_afk> i can glean that its possessable
20:01 < ldlework> oh dadness?
20:01 < ldlework> sure ok
20:01 < dmiles_afk> and that it realates to other beings in which they may enjoyiit and refer it to nice
20:01 < ldlework> haha no
20:01 < ldlework> your thing doesn't do that
20:01 < ldlework> but you mean
20:02 < ldlework> can be percieved as nice
20:02 < ldlework> or can be nice
20:02 < dmiles_afk> and other beings have things like dads.. but have no idea what dads are
20:02 < ldlework> I thought you covered that in the possesive
20:02 < dmiles_afk> but at least one dad can be percieved as nice
20:02 < ldlework> can and has
20:03 < dmiles_afk> if you say "my whatnot"   that meant being may have whatnots
20:03 < ldlework> right I get you
20:03 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: if your thing wasn't written in prolog I'd definitely be down to help you help it understand lojban
20:04 < dmiles_afk> what languages do you program in ldlework?
20:04 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: python, javascript, C# and nim, mostly
20:04 < dmiles_afk> (right now the bot also understands ACE )
20:05 < ldlework> I don't quite understand how to parse with parsers so I've never toyed with this stuff
20:05 < dmiles_afk> i have a C# bot called cogbot but stopped working on it :(
20:06 < dmiles_afk> none of the AI code is in the C# part though
20:06 < dmiles_afk> well ecpec thte pathfinder i wrote
20:07 < dmiles_afk> i was appalled it that no one had ever wrtten an opensource 3d pathfiinder in C#
20:07 < dmiles_afk> so i published one
20:14 < dmiles_afk> btw i was going to make it speak/thinnk in lojban :)
20:14 < dmiles_afk> but i decied fopl keeps me focused
20:15 < dmiles_afk> (i been working on AI for 25 years..  and most of those years are me trying to code something distracting the AI needs to avoid the real challenge)
20:16 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: would you characterize your bot as an inference machine or semantic reasoner
20:17 < dmiles_afk> its a theorem pver/ semantic reasoner
20:18 < dmiles_afk> i am trying to prove that Mark Stickels CNF resolution method is possble
20:18 < dmiles_afk> even though in everyone has declared it too combinatoric
20:19 < dmiles_afk> for 15 years people been writting papers about how to lose tautological data as a performance boost
20:20 < dmiles_afk> (about canceling out   p v ~p  )
20:20 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: do you mind if I ask a completely unrelated question
20:20 < dmiles_afk> but they lose quantification
20:20 < dmiles_afk> go ahead
20:21 < dmiles_afk> i now think the new SAT techniques only proliferate that methodolgy
20:22 < ldlework> what do you think about applying genetic algorithms to assist with the design of neural networks?
20:22 < dmiles_afk>  genetic algorithms will improve most anything ...
20:23 < ldlework> haha
20:23 < dmiles_afk> but neural networks?
20:23 < dmiles_afk> (what about them that need improvemnt? )
20:23 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: generally its pretty tough to create a topology that works best for your problem
20:24 < dmiles_afk> i started using GA to decide some heuristics.. that was a real speed up
20:24 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: I use GA to create virtual life-forms
20:24 < ldlework> probably the most boring use-case academically
20:24 < dmiles_afk> though secretly i know the GA (how i implmented will bite me when my uses change)(
20:25 < dmiles_afk> when my usage of the system that it optimises
20:25 < ldlework> right
20:26 < ldlework> dmiles_afk: I use them to basically evolve goal-driven behavior graphs
20:26 < ldlework> well, behavior tables
20:26 < dmiles_afk> see that is 100% right on
20:26 < ldlework> behavior graphs would be amazing why haven't I thought of that
20:26 < ldlework> well
20:26 < ldlework> techincally it is a graph I suppose
20:26 < dmiles_afk> (not a NN right?)
20:26 < ldlework> nope
20:26 < ldlework> imagine a grid
20:26 < dmiles_afk> thank god
20:26 < ldlework> on the grid you place some agents
20:26 < ldlework> the agents can 'see' the 4 squares around them
20:27 < ldlework> at each turn, the agent takes what they see, and look up what they should do in some table
20:27 < ldlework> everytime an agent runs over a piece of food I get them some fitness
20:27 < ldlework> I breed them and eventually they are good at finding food
20:27 < ldlework> then I introduce a second species that gets points for eating the first species :P
20:29 < ldlework> I have tinkered with ideas about making it a continuous simulation rather than a generative one
20:29 < ldlework> after 500 turns I stop the simulation and do cross-breeding among the highest ranked and then start the simulation over again with the new population
20:29 < ldlework> doing it continuously would be tricky because you need some method of breeding
20:29 < ldlework> birth
20:29 < ldlework> and so on
20:29 < dmiles_afk> what are the genes dictating?
20:29 < ldlework> the genes are the look-up table
20:30 < ldlework> the table has a key for every possible combination of what they see
20:30 < dmiles_afk> what they see to how they react?
20:30 < ldlework> mapping to some action
20:30 < ldlework> yes
20:30 < ldlework> actually its a bit more nuanced than that
20:30 < ldlework> there's an additional input
20:30 < ldlework> "what state am I in?"
20:30 < ldlework> which is just an integer
20:30 < ldlework> the mapping includes what to do
20:30 < ldlework> but what the next state is too
20:31 < ldlework> this drastically improves the complexity of the behavior
20:31 < dmiles_afk> "how abundent or scarce is food?"    "do i even care about abundancy?"
20:31 < ldlework> since now they can 'plan' and 'orchestrate' action
20:31 < ldlework> like turns and such
20:31 < dmiles_afk> "do i care if dad sees me eat his baby?"
20:31 < ldlework> heh
20:32 < ldlework> I just realized, I never change the mapped action
20:32 < dmiles_afk> so what happens if you increase the rules of their world?
20:32 < ldlework> increase the rules?
20:32 < dmiles_afk> (like for instance the previous genration protects their young from being eaten)
20:32 < dmiles_afk> or agression for pleasure
20:33 < dmiles_afk> (things to distract the easing process)
20:33 < ldlework> remember there's no intelligence
20:33 < ldlework> its just look up tables
20:33 < dmiles_afk> easing/eating
20:33 < ldlework> the GA finds that look up table that is best for walking over food squares
20:33 < ldlework> in the search space of possible beahvior tables
20:35 < dmiles_afk> sounds neat though
20:35 < dmiles_afk> well can always add desise
20:35 < dmiles_afk> erm what desiese
20:36 < dmiles_afk> see the theory is.. if you add some weird unrealted incidents in tehir life that follows some course.. their GA will adappt arround it
20:36 < dmiles_afk> (even thugh they dont do anyhting other than exactly what they do)
20:37 < dmiles_afk> for example.. you add a lake where hey might drown in the middle of the tile world
20:37 < dmiles_afk> will will breed whatnots that will somehow avoid the lake.. yet we cant really see how they did that
20:39 < dmiles_afk> even though that was supposed to be evoluiton requireing special functionalty such of the kind only a NN would provide
20:52 < ldlework> oh sure
21:28  * nuzba @464161niftg: pilin pona. a, jan mute li toki e ni: toki Lojban li kute sama toki Slav (Sula? Lawe? La?¥ [http://bit.ly/1RhyFGw]
21:56 < kmir> coi io
21:57 < kmir> ma jundi
22:23 < spollei> coi la kmir
22:23 < kmir> ui coi do
22:24 < kmir> xu do slabu mi .i'unai
22:24 < spollei> na slabu
22:25 < kmir> je'e .i ko skicu do a'u
22:25 < spollei> mi zu tavla
22:26 < kmir> tavla ca ma
22:27 < spollei> masti li so'o
22:28 < kmir> .i xu do lojbo tadni puzu masti be li so'o
22:30 < spollei> mi di'inai tadni
22:31 < kmir> ua je'e
22:31 < spollei> mi di'inai tadni lo lojbo bangu
22:32 < kmir> .i caku do ca'o se cinri ma
22:34 < spollei> zoi url http://blogs.perl.org/users/drforr/2015/07/perl5-to-perl6-conversion-a-la-perlcritic.html url
22:36 < kmir> .ua .i mi na jimpe no da poi me la perl u'i
22:39 < spollei> mi zi sipna
22:40 < kmir> .i ko pluka senva
22:41 < spollei> ki'e la kmir co'o
22:42  * kmir sanga lu .i ku'i no da tirna .i no da tirna do~~
22:59  * nuzba @uitki: ¡Bienvenido!/Español - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/%C2%A1Bienvenido!/Espa%C3%B1ol por Gleki [http://bit.ly/1Cm51JY]
23:01  * nuzba @uitki: Добро пожаловать!/Русский - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/%D0%94%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%BE_%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B6%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8C!/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9 by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1Cm53S7]
23:03  * nuzba @uitki: 已更新页面：Bienvenue !/fr - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Bienvenue_!/fr 由 Gleki [http://bit.ly/1Cm5agq]
23:05  * nuzba @uitki: 已更新页面：欢迎！ (中文) - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/%E6%AC%A2%E8%BF%8E%EF%BC%81_(%E4%B8%AD%E6%96%87) 由 Gleki [http://bit.ly/1Cm5gEP]
23:49 < keegi> MEM: 16202 MB - 25% (4050 MB) free
--- Day changed Tue Jul 07 2015
00:14 < gleki> LIVLABOT: sutysisku now able to search for glosswords (currently  only direct match works) http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/index.html#sisku/tanru%20and
04:07  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
04:08 < ctefaho> coi
04:17 < ctefaho> ldlework: so I think what you said in yesterday is basically one of the things I am doing in my dialect, or at least trying to do
04:18 < ctefaho> as part of the "containment of truth"
04:19 < ctefaho> /assertion
05:03 < ctefaho> ldlework: To me *all* bridi have a default NA as ja'a, including main-bridi and sub-bridi having their own NA. The truth of all NA are considered separately, and formal expansion never adds, removes, alters, morphs or moves NA around (like merging 2 bridi with 2 NA into 1 tanru with 1 NA). The truth of noi/"adjectival" clauses' assertion (which the gadri are still based on) are always separate
05:03 < ctefaho> from the truth of the assertion of the bridi it appears in. and there is none of the "default-predicate-entailment" you speak of. In "lo/le/da/pa/whatever Tcàdu cu [ja'a] Mèlbi" The assertion of the resulting noi-clause may be true or false and the assertion the main bridi may be true or false, independent of each other. Do tell if this is in-compatible with your view.
05:03  * ctefaho bbiab
05:19  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: 誰かロジバンで"vowel"ってなんていうか教えて    e'o jungau mi lodu'u fu makau fanva fe zoi gy. vowel gy. lo jbobau [http://bit.ly/1glcte0]
05:24 < gleki> it's a well known bug/feature of Lojban that ja'a is two syllables otherwise {cu} would be useless
05:25 < gleki> mensi: doi zipcpi i think  i fixed relevance in sutysisku search. now it outputs words for "and" first. see what else you need to make this app perfect http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/index.html#sisku/and
05:25 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.zipcpi.gy. di'a cusku da
05:33  * nuzba @mochirial: @oka_iu_tcan jbovlaste の訳ではダメなんですか？    http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/lookup?Form=lookup.pl1&Strategy=*&Database=en%3C-%3Ejbo&Query=vowel&submit=Search [http://bit.ly/1gldHpF]
05:37  * nuzba @Space2O2: I think it is a little difficult to talk about elementary particles in Lojban. That is because the words related to them are incomplete yet. [http://bit.ly/1gle2bT]
05:39 < gleki> and when they become complete we'll know everything about the universe
05:39 < zipcpi> What's the best way to say a clock is "fast" or "slow"?
05:39 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: i think  i fixed relevance in sutysisku search. now it outputs words for "and" first.
05:39 < mensi> see what else you need to make this app perfect http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/index.html#sisku/and |
05:39 < mensi> 2015-07-07T12:25:37.878Z
05:41 < zipcpi> zo bercribe na se jbovlaste
05:52 < ctefaho> gleki: I made ja'a to ja. I use .a .e .o .u for the logical connectives in the simplified system leaving ja/je/jo/ju free
05:52 < ctefaho> so say hello to "mi ja klama" and "mi klama .ecu broda"
05:53 < ctefaho> I honestly can't think of anything else that would suit .a/.e/.o/.u better than the logicals
05:54 < gleki> hahaha
05:54 < gleki> tell that selpahi
05:54 < zipcpi> Tell what to selpahi?
05:55 < ctefaho> I assume selpai is gonna use them for some tonal-like feature
05:56 < gleki> he wanted A to go away
05:56 < gleki> although i once proposed A as this is how it was in Loglan originally
05:57 < zipcpi> Oh simplified connectives?
05:57 < ctefaho> well I don't always agree with selpai
05:57 < gleki> en: selpai
05:57 < ctefaho> (it is a pun on senpai)
05:57 < zipcpi> se pajni
05:57 < gleki> backup time
05:58 < gleki> ditcu lo nu lo se snura fukpi
05:59 < gleki> use {li} for {ja'a}. like in tok pisin
05:59 < ctefaho> gleki: so is he gonna use .a/.e/.o/.u for something or did he just want to nuke them?
05:59 < gleki> he never told for what he could use them
05:59 < gleki> and i dont care
06:00 < ctefaho> je'e
06:00 < gleki> please everyone test new relevance search in sutysisku.
06:00 < gleki> relevance is now the priority
06:22  * nuzba @okau_junpe: 説明文翻訳案に訂正に訂正を重ねて管理者の方には申し訳なかったけれど…でも本当にいい辞書だと思う。 la sutysisku 。ロジバンについてちょっと調べたいという時に感動的なくらいに便利だ。 http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/ [http://bit.ly/1CkvTJZ]
06:24  * nuzba @okau_junpe: La sutysisku. Bona vortara ilo, mi opinias. Ĝi estas rave uzebla, kiam oni serĉas iom da informo pri loĝbanaj vortoj. http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/ [http://bit.ly/1CkwjA5]
06:43 < gleki> lojxbanaj
06:43 < gleki> ne logxbanaj
06:44 < gleki> sed la sutysisku ne estas nur lojxbana vortara
06:48 < zipcpi> What's the best way to say a clock is "fast" or "slow"?
06:48 < gleki> je'esai
06:49 < gleki> i zo'onai i dont know any ways, not even the best :D
06:49 < zipcpi> :p
06:50 < zipcpi> (of a clock or watch) showing a time ahead of the correct time.
06:50 < gleki> start from wiktionary probably
06:50 < gleki> another vision of this is that it counts time intervals too fast
06:51 < durka42> junla be lo tordydu'e?
06:51 < zipcpi> Yeah I think that would be the most literal interpretation of {sutra} / {dukse sutra}; but generally we mean that it's ahead of the correct time when we say "fast"
06:51 < gleki> lo junla cu te tcidu lo ba tcika
06:52 < zipcpi> I'm thinking {jai clira} or {jai lerci}, but that might be vague or confusing
06:52 < gleki> y
06:52 < gleki> lo junla cu te tcidu lo tcika be lo lerci
06:53 < zipcpi> A clock that reads a time of late
06:54 < zipcpi> Hm that = fast?
06:54 < zipcpi> But {jai clira} seems like that = fast
06:54 < zipcpi> Hence the confusion :p
06:56 < durka42> well as you said there are two interpretations
06:56 < durka42> either it's actually fast, or it's just set to the wrong time
06:56 < durka42> the distinction ought to be "found in translation" to lojban :p
06:56 < zipcpi> I believe the "wrong time" sense is more common; measuring "actually too fast" requires more observation
06:57 < zipcpi> And of course, the latter would cause the former
06:58 < durka42> right
06:58 < durka42> once I had a microprocessor clock that definitely ran fast, and I hooked it up to a computer overnight to gather data
06:59 < durka42> in the morning it showed 0% inaccuracy
06:59 < durka42> and after that it never ran fast again
06:59 < gleki> "goes fast" is that it inevitably will show late time. you  will notice it sooner r later.
06:59 < gleki> another meaning of "fast" is that it is simply set wrong initially
06:59 < durka42> early
06:59 < durka42> oh no wait, late
07:00 < durka42> gah
07:00 < zipcpi> Well it's "early" in that it shows a time earlier than it should
07:00 < zipcpi> Erm
07:00 < zipcpi> {shows a time} earlier than it should
07:00 < zipcpi> graaah
07:00 < gleki> dang, now i cant understand my lojbna translation but im completely confused by the english metaphor
07:00 < durka42> scooooope
07:01 < durka42> lo'e snidu be ma'i le junla cu tordu
07:01 < gleki> lo junla cu te tcidu lo tcika be lo lerci - clock is a "book (a thing that we read" on which we read the timestamp of a later event
07:01 < durka42> (or {be fi} but let's pretend ro ma'i zei terbri cu spoja vau zo'o zo'onai)
07:02 < gleki> http://tatoeba.org/jbo/sentences/show/3734313
07:02 < gleki> .title
07:02 < gleki> translation challenge
07:02 < fenki> [ mupli lo uenzi be lo bangenugu fa "zoi zoi Tom was right after all. zoi" (to la'oi Tatoeba toi) ]
07:02 < zipcpi> The problem is that {clira} and {lerci} are somewhat subject to interpretation. Either a "fast" clock shows a {lerci} time, or it is {clira} in showing time
07:03 < gleki> not in my translation imo
07:03 < gleki> 2. (used of timepieces) indicating a time ahead of or later than the correct time
07:04 < gleki> it's from WordNet
07:05 < zipcpi> You can say that it shows a time, earlier than it should show it
07:05 < gleki> "That clock is one minute fast."
07:05 < zipcpi> = The clock reads one minute later than it should, or The clock reads a time, one minute earlier than it should
07:05 < gleki> exp: lo va junla cu te tcidu lo tcika pe baza lo mentu be li pa
07:05 < mensi> ([lo {va junla} KU] [cu {te tcidu} {lo <tcika (¹pe [{ba za} {lo <mentu (²be [li {pa BOI} LOhO] BEhO²)> KU}] GEhU¹)> KU} VAU])
07:06 < gleki> WordNet has its opinion
07:06 < durka42> le junla cu jarco lo'e tcika pu ri zi lo mentu be li pa
07:06 < zipcpi> That's WordNet's definition, but "early" and "late" can have different interpretations depending on how you want to expand them, and that's the problem with defining something like {julclira}
07:07 < gleki> i prefer {jai gau zgana fai}
07:07 < gleki> and i think you forgot {pe} somewhere
07:08 < gleki> no word for "alarm" and "alarm" clock" in lojban
07:08 < zipcpi> You're here early - The clock shows "1:00" earlier than it should
07:08 < zipcpi> = The clock is fast
07:09 < zipcpi> fanza zo'o
07:09 < gleki> sinxa junla probably for alarm clock
07:09 < zipcpi> Nah... we need a word for alarm/siren
07:09 < gleki> lujvo mean what you make them mean
07:09 < zipcpi> But we'd need a word for alarm/siren, without the clock
07:10 < gleki> lo tutci be lo nu jungau fi lo ckape a lo na se djica
07:13 < zipcpi> By my own intuition, I believe {julclira} = "fast" while {julylerci} = "slow", but some others might disagree, thinking that describing the time read is more important than the sense of whether the *clock* is early or late
07:14 < zipcpi> Also seems awfully specific for a lujvo, but no idea how else to condense the concept
07:14 < gleki> i now feel that i really fixed everythin i could and should in sutysisku
07:15 < gleki> what isnt fixed is the ugliness of jvs db itself but that's another problem
07:15 < zipcpi> By the way thanks for the glossword fix
07:16 < gleki> pls report of anything else you want
07:16 < gleki> i only noticed that some glosswords needed fixing in jvs itself
07:16 < zipcpi> lo junla cu dukse lo ka jai clira fai lo ka arco lo tcika
07:17 < gleki> jbo: arco
07:17 < mensi> 18 da se tolcri: jarco, bilma, cmila, junla, kindi'u, mipri, ri'e, sa, salci, simlu, skami, ta, ti, tigni, tu, vidnyja'o,
07:17 < mensi> vidnyxra, xendo
07:29 < gleki> en: arco
07:29 < mensi> arco = x1 shows/demonstrates x2 (object/event) to audience x3 |>>> Where jarco is for showing/displaying a property,
07:29 < mensi> this word is to be used for showing/demonstrating an object. |>>> spheniscine
07:29 < gleki> =zgagau?
07:30 < gleki> gasygau even 
07:30 < zipcpi> I'm not sure
07:30 < zipcpi> I jumpt between sajgau, zgagau, and gasygau until I just said, screw it, let's just define arco
07:31 < gleki> then mentioning jarco is useless here because then jarco would be just {arco lo ka}
07:32 < zipcpi> lo se ckaji be ma
07:33 < gleki> ko'a arco lo ka ce'u broda = ko'a arco lo su'u ko'a broda
07:33 < zipcpi> So we want arco2 to be able to be both an object and a property?
07:33 < zipcpi> That's just how {jarco} was used before
07:34 < zipcpi> The recommendation of the gimste to use {tu'a} didn't quite make sense
07:35 < gleki> for me jarco is about manifestation not about showing anything
07:36 < zipcpi> jb: jarco
07:36 < mensi> jarco = jarco — x1(entity)  demonstrates or shows  x2(property of x1)  to  x3(entity)
07:36 < mensi> :lo se jarco — demonstrated, manifested property.
07:36 < mensi> :fi mi'a fa la Alis cu jarco lo ka stati — To us Alice appeared to be smart.
07:36 < mensi> :la Kevin cu jarco lo ka gidva — Kevin acts as a guide.
07:36 < mensi> :Related words: tigni, cipra, zgana, jvinu, lanli, mipri, simlu
07:36 < gleki> as for abstraction non-ka places in La Bangu any such place can be used as a ka-place and ce'u will refer to x1 unless specifed explicitly otherwise
07:36 < zipcpi> Specified how? {ka} doesn't have an x2
07:38 < gleki> x2(property of x1) <-- specified
07:38 < zipcpi> I meant your nonce-ka places
07:39 < gleki> they are just e.g. "x2 (clause)". this is where it's not specified
07:41 < zipcpi> Oh you mean {mi arco lo nu salci} vs {mi arco lo ka salci}?
07:42 < gleki> yes
07:42 < zipcpi> Just like {ma djica lo nu cenba} vs {ma djica lo ka cenba}
07:42 < gleki> any nu place can always be converted to ka
07:43 < zipcpi> Not sure about always. {lo ka broda cu fasnu}...
07:44 < gleki> here it's nonce place
07:44 < gleki> there are some examples of it
07:44 < durka42> o_O
07:44 < gleki> jb: ckilu
07:44 < mensi> ckilu = ckilu — x1(property of nonce place with kau)  is a scale of units for measuring  x2(property of nonce place with
07:44 < mensi> kau)
07:44 < mensi> :lo ckilu — scale.
07:44 < mensi> :lo ka mitre ma kau cu ckilu lo ka te sepli ma kau ma kau — Metric scale measures the distance between two points.
07:44 < mensi> :Related words: gradu, merli, cimde, manri
07:44 < zipcpi> Maybe your jarco is to arco what kaidji is to djica
07:45 < gleki> because in ckilu someone deleted gradu1 so gradu1 is no longer accessible
07:45 < durka42> mi na'e jimpe
07:45 < durka42> zo ckilu
07:45 < gleki> no, my jarco isnt related to zgzgau, sajgau, gasygau at all
07:45 < gleki> durka42: ckilu is basically {zi'o gradu}
07:45 < zipcpi> You still use the word "show", and it still has an audience place
07:46 < gleki> "to manifest" is a better gloss
07:46 < gleki> english doesnt have good glosses for that
07:47 < zipcpi> Yeah, I'm starting to become more sure that we are really stretching to save {jarco} here
07:49 < gleki> ca lo vanci la barak obamas cu jarco lo ka rirni lo tixnu be vo'a vau lo lanzu be vo'a e la'a lo drata prenu
07:49 < gleki> i ku'i ca lo djedi cu jarco lo ka presidente
07:49 < gleki> sa
07:49 < zipcpi> x1 fi x2 fe x3 sajgau gi'a visygau gi'a zgagau gi'a selsaugau gi'a me'au lo simsa
07:49 < gleki> i ku'i ca lo donri cu jarco lo ka presidente
07:50 < gleki> remove visygau and replace with gasygau
07:50 < zipcpi> That's what la a'ernai defined it as
07:50 < gleki> things can be shown to blind people
07:50 < zipcpi> Yeah...
07:51 < cliva> vi'o
07:51 < gleki> ue
07:51 < gleki> coi la cliva mi'e lo co'a cliva
07:51 < cliva> coi co'o
07:52 < cliva> ta'o
07:52 < cliva> spagetufa: bi'ylga
07:52 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?!\u0020] or end of input but "b" found.
07:52 < cliva> y
07:52  * cliva cu xruti lo ka zvati lo ctino
07:52 < zipcpi> What would you want that to mean?
07:53 < cliva> cnino ke zi'evla tarmi vau sa'u
07:53 < zipcpi> u'i
07:54 < zipcpi> ro vlatai cu ei se snigau vau zo'o
07:55 < cliva> .ei zasti fa su proga poi ki lo cunso valsi cu cupra je cu snigau
07:57 < zipcpi> markenofi'e: x1 is the destroyer of worlds x2 containing cats x3 owned by x4 under conditions x5 with epistemology x6
07:57 < cliva> mu'a ie .u'i
07:57 < cliva> .i lo nu ba'e cupra zo'u la'e di'e zasti http://zbaga.ax.lt/thethat.html?big .i ku'i pilno ge nai lo gerna gi li malrxaka
07:58 < zipcpi> si'au na akti
07:59 < cliva> spofu va'o la romge
07:59 < cliva> .i ri'a bo mi lazni lo ka pilno la strelka fancu ku ne la djavaskripti
08:00 < cliva> .i la faglo'u zo'u na spofu
08:00 < zipcpi> ie
08:00 < zipcpi> za'a
08:17 < zipcpi> ei co'o
08:24 < zipcpi> Other idea on fast/slow clocks; build it off {xa'o/za'o}. fast = "It's already showing 1:00 (when it's only 0:55)"; slow = "It's still showing 1:00 (when it's 1:05)"
08:25 < zipcpi> Dang this dimension confusion
08:27 < zipcpi> xa'o has no rafsi though so we have to cheat by using wrong hyphens
08:30 < zipcpi> Maybe just {julbavja'o}; {julpruja'o}
08:32 < zipcpi> ca'e ra'oi ja'o co'a rafsi zo arco jenai zo jarco iau zo'oru'e
08:45 < gleki> interesting that Interlingua has many more sentence in Tatoeba but it has only 4 contributors. We have 18 but still we lag behind.
08:56 < gleki> the second day LMW is up and nothing is happening  to it
09:00  * nuzba @uitki: Ложбан и самогоноварение - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/%D0%9B%D0%BE%D0%B6%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%BD_%D0%B8_%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5 by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1HbhsDY]
11:29  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
11:29  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
12:22  * ctefaho just ran into the Swedish version of lojban.org
12:23 < ctefaho> it's...
12:23 < ctefaho> weird
12:34 < bigcentaur> .i ma cizra do
12:36 < ctefaho> primarily the "Vid fyra års ålder dog Anders mormor" ambiguity example which is *not* ambigious at all in Swedish
12:37 < ctefaho> ...which I think is supposed to be instead of the "He's left" example
12:38 < bigcentaur> .i mi na pu zgana de'u
12:38 < ctefaho> maybe "Anders mormor dog vid fyra års ålder" would be a bit ambigious
12:38 < ctefaho> ambiguous*
12:38 < ctefaho> actually no lol that example sentence is complete fail
12:40 < ctefaho> unless you are speaking very bad swedish
12:41  * ctefaho pokes gleki with a stick
13:46 < Amnadya> ma g
13:50 < Amnadya> ma nuzba
14:05 < zipcpi> gleki: {kajde} might be good for "alarm"
14:05 < Amnadya> coi. attàwîl.
14:05 < zipcpi> coi
14:08 < zipcpi> More crazy CKTJ ideas: {ru'e} -> {rei}. Let {xei} be hex digit fourteen; we don't need to book two monosyllabic cmavo for it :p
14:12 < zahlman> what's CKTJ?
14:13 < zipcpi> "ce ki tau jau", a dialect/fork that swaps certain common, longer cmavo with rarer, shorter cmavo
14:14 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ce_ki_tau_jau
14:14 < zahlman> named for certain of the swaps, I presume?
14:14 < zipcpi> Yep
14:17 < Amnadya> la cektaujbo
14:17 < zipcpi> I defined {tcekitaujau} and {tcekitaujei}
14:18 < zipcpi> zei: cektaujbo
14:18 < mensi> creka zei tanru zei lojbo
14:18 < zipcpi> u'i
14:20  * nuzba @uitki: ce ki tau jau - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ce_ki_tau_jau by Spheniscine [http://bit.ly/1HecA3U]
15:00 < durka42> o hai zipcpi I'm in ur definishunz fixin ur linkz
15:03 < zipcpi> Hi
15:03 < durka42> oh there aren't actually links in the notes field
15:03 < durka42> that's lame
15:03 < zipcpi> Yeah
15:04 < durka42> it only calls Wiki::mini()
15:04 < durka42> not Wiki::interpret()
15:05 < durka42> I wonder if it strips tags...
15:07 < durka42> o_O it does not
15:08 < durka42> fuck
15:08 < durka42> zipcpi: http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/tcekitaujei :)
15:08 < zipcpi> Yeah I saw
15:08 < durka42> yeahhhhh
15:08 < zipcpi> That's kinda dangerous if a user can just inject arbitrary JS
15:08 < durka42> it should strip all HTML tags
15:09 < durka42> man JVS is so insecure
15:09 < durka42> were you around when I managed to log in as officialdata by accident
15:09 < zipcpi> No lol
15:09 < durka42> I just constructed my own session cookie
15:09 < zipcpi> Mm cookies
15:09 < durka42> mmhmm
15:09 < zipcpi> No idea how that idiom came about
15:27 < durka42> so after all that we could have used <br/> for linebreaks in the notes, heh
15:27 < durka42> but $\\$ will still work after I submit a patch to strip tags
15:27 < zipcpi> Scale-breaking madness: http://www.quantum-munich.de/research/negative-absolute-temperature/
15:29 < zipcpi> +0 != -0. Bye bye math :p
15:31 < durka42> psh, already true in IEEE794 floating point
15:31 < zipcpi> lol
15:33 < f8l> Integer underflow. :-Þ
15:34 < zipcpi> Yep, they integer underflowed the universe
15:46 < f8l> ‘exited state’. I guess I’ve found a typo.
16:14 < ctefaho> camxes: cfladri
16:14 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "c" found.
16:14 < ctefaho> :(
16:14 < Amnadya> slinkuhi
16:16 < ctefaho> how exactly?
16:16 < Amnadya> because pacfladri is a lujvo
16:17 < ctefaho> right
16:18 < ctefaho> fitting how that became evil law causing sadness
16:27 < ctefaho> camxes: cflaidrei
16:27 < camxes> (cflaidrei VAU)
16:27 < ctefaho> ui
16:33 < Amnadya> eqtal ki. do gleki
16:38 < Amnadya> (eqtalûb)
17:32  * nuzba @redstatist: lmao remember lojban [http://bit.ly/1gmHCxG]
17:32 < durka42> mi morji tu'a la .lojban.
17:49  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
19:34  * nuzba @fotono: lo #lojban zantufa tricu cu banro http://guskant.github.io/gerna_cipra/zantufa_farvi.svg .i e'u te ciski lo cnino ke jonma'o ciste fo la'e di'e http://mw.lojban.org/papri/zantufa_jonma%27o [http://bit.ly/1HdQRpI]
19:42  * nuzba @fotono: su lo #lojban zantufa tricu cu banro http://guskant.github.io/gerna_cipra/zantufa_farvi.svg i e'u te ciksi lo cnino ke jonma'o ciste fo la'e di'e http://mw.lojban.org/papri/zantufa_jonma%27o [http://bit.ly/1HdSx2s]
22:58  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: @oka_iu_tcan ロジバン [http://bit.ly/1J3sfRQ]
23:15 < cliva> zantufa: gijetigitigiti
23:15 < zantufa> ([{gi je} ti {<gi ti> <gi ti>} GIhI] VAU)
23:15 < cliva> ketitibroda
23:15 < cliva> zantufa: ketitibroda
23:15 < zantufa> ([ke ti ti KEhE] CU [broda VAU])
23:15 < cliva> zantufa: ketitike'ejeputa
23:15 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "j" cu se tolcri
23:16 < cliva> zantufa: ketitike'ejeketa
23:16 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "j" cu se tolcri
23:16 < cliva> zantufa: pukujeca
23:16 < zantufa> ([{pu ku} {je <ca KU>}] VAU)
23:16 < durka42> oh dear
23:16 < cliva> nu tinke sai
23:16 < durka42> .u'i
23:17 < durka42> xu do sanji lo nabmi pe lo nu zo gi gau za'upamei
23:17 < durka42> zantufa: gije gija ti gi ti gi ti
23:17 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [uU] .onai [yY] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
23:18 < cliva> iep
23:18 < durka42> je'e
23:18 < cliva> spagetufa: +cktj su mei'e ti ta tu mi do di'e cu mo
23:18 < spagetufa> ([FA {<su BOI> <mei'e (¹ti ta tu mi do di'e¹) MEI'O> KU}] [cu {mo VAU}])
23:19 < durka42> ma nau zbusufukai
23:20 < cliva> si'au G zbusufukairai
23:23 < cliva> lo zunle nu jmaji zo'u tu'a PEG boi po'o na banzu lo nu pagbu lo te pruce
23:23 < cliva> spagetufa: tijetajatu
23:23 < spagetufa> ([FA {<ti je ta> ja tu}] VAU)
23:23 < cliva> ^ ti se gasnu se pi'o lo djavaskripti
23:25 < durka42> .i'e
23:25 < durka42> mi to'e djica lo nu PEG setca zo fa po'onai
23:25 < durka42> lo nu setca lo vrici cu te sampla pe'i
23:26 < cliva> ie .i lo me PEG co krasi be la .altatufa cu to'e jinsa ri'a ku
23:26 < durka42> ba'asai
23:27 < cliva> (to ku'i lo me la spagetufa moi na ba'e mutce lo ka jismau toi)
23:27 < durka42> .u'i
--- Day changed Wed Jul 08 2015
00:01 < gleki> {grafu} and {fardu} are useful
00:48 < gleki> "middleware"
00:48 < gleki> ma xe fanva
01:02  * nuzba @patrickDurusau: Today's Special on Universal Languages #Lojban #logic http://ow.ly/PiJv9 [http://bit.ly/1IICBuE]
01:20  * nuzba @464161niftg: la xarju .iu sei fasybau fanva xamsku cu ctuca fo la lojban [http://bit.ly/1G6zvdu]
02:20  * nuzba @okau_junpe: pe'i xamgu fa la sutysisku .i lo djica co facki be lo sampu datni be lo valsi cu se prali lo se manci lo ka pilno  http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/ [http://bit.ly/1NNIeam]
02:58 < PrincessBecca> au mi klama lo gusta poi se cusku fo la'o zoi http://makeupbycharada.com.au/?p=500 zoi
03:08 < gleki> poi se skicu
03:08 < gleki> jb: skicu
03:08 < mensi> skicu = skicu — x1(entity)  tells about, describes  x2(entity)  to  x3(entity)  with description  x4(proposition)
03:08 < mensi> :lo skicu — describer. lo se skicu — described, told about. lo ve skicu — description.
03:08 < mensi> :le gidva pu skicu fi mi'a fe lo nu mi'a cliva ca lo lerci vau lo nu lo aftobuso pu'o tsuku — The guide explained to us
03:08 < mensi> that we would leave later in that the bus hadn't yet arrived.
03:08 < mensi> :mi pu skicu lo cinri lisri lo mi panzi — I told an interesting story to my child.
03:08 < mensi> :Comment: skicu is to tell, cusku is to say, tavla is to talk, cusku lo notci is to notify.
03:08 < mensi> :Related words: lisri, tavla
03:09 < gleki> skicu is to tell, cusku is to say, tavla is to talk,   
03:09 < PrincessBecca> je'e
03:09 < gleki> cusku lo notci is to notify.
03:10 < gleki> i noticed that some esperanto speakers dont see the difference between "diri" and "paroli". well, in this la bangu dictionary i added the explicit annotation
03:13 < PrincessBecca> i think it's less about not seeing the difference, more about trying to talk spontaneously and messing up while learning.
03:14 < PrincessBecca> a lot of komencantoj de Esperanto don't realize that "paroli" exists, or that "diri" exists, and generalize. the same sort of happened with me.
04:11 < Amnadya> cahe rinsa - attàwîl.
04:12 < gleki> ma nuzba lo nu tinkygau ibu
04:12 < gleki> vau coi la amnadiia
04:13 < Amnadya> pamai ba lonu mohu xrukla lomi zdani cu retsku sohi da la kixadas
04:14 < gleki> do ko'oiru'e na forgese si co'u morji zo'ei la mupli
04:14 < Amnadya> i aho ky tugni filoduhu spofu
04:14 < Amnadya> mina forgese
04:14 < gleki> gi'e zukte noda zo'o
04:14 < gleki> sa i go'oi tugni gi'e zukte no da
04:19  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
04:22 < Amnadya> fanza falonu ky na pu tugni filoduhu ihy claxu zo coha je zo cohu vuho poi sumtcita to genrkasu toi
04:22 < Amnadya> ikuhu jaha claxu
04:23 < gleki> i ja'o mo i ja'o fa ei lo selbri bangu cu jinga
04:24 < gleki> i kuhi do jinvi fe laha lo duhu lo itkuiile cu ei se pilno bangu i kuhi xu jaha gohi ei
04:24 < Amnadya> jaho bahepehi ei jmina lo re genrkasu
04:25 < gleki> la lojban ca spoja ki'u tu'a ma'oi bai
04:25 < Amnadya> ri na pagbu ihy
04:25 < Amnadya> ina nabmi ihy
04:26 < gleki> lo rafsi poi simsa ma'oi bai cu pagbu kuhi
04:26 < Amnadya> ie ikuhi nohe simsa lo lojbo loka spofu
04:27 < gleki> fau lo nu claxu so'o lo rafsi pe ma'oi bai vau na ku xu plixau da'i fa lo nu vimcu ro lo simsa rafsi gi'e pilno lo drata tutci
04:28 < Amnadya> li genrkasu cu vajni je jicmu pagbu la itkuhilu
04:28 < Amnadya> lo*
04:29 < Amnadya> i jiha frili pagbu
04:30 < Amnadya> lonu mulgau noi nu jmina jihi ci cnino genrkasu cu xagmau lo nu vimcu roda
04:30 < gleki> i xu naku cumki fa lonu ba sarcu fa lo nu jmina lo pa ki'o simsa rafsi
04:30 < Ilmen> .u'e ti'e la .valman.  noi bangu zo'u lo panra be zo je cu selbri
04:31 < gleki> la valman na slabu mi
04:31 < Amnadya> xu lo preti cu srana lu fiho kibystu lihu
04:32 < gleki> na go'i i srana lu fi'o gerku li'u
04:32 < Amnadya> lahasai tau li kiho na sarcu
04:46 < gleki> mi pu zo'onmo stidi lo nu zo li basti zo cu i a'o jai gau spofu fai no da
04:46 < gleki> si zasti
05:14 < gleki> en: tcanaca
05:14 < mensi> tcanaca = x1 is the node of present concern/is the current position in graph x3 (not necessarily oriented; notice the
05:14 < mensi> terbri number), connected (possibly indirectly) to/with other nodes x2 (possibly incomplete set) via (oriented) paths x4
05:14 < mensi> |>>> "Current position" is in thought. See also: grafu, tcanaba, tcanapu. |>>> krtisfranks
05:14 < gleki> en: tcanapu
05:14 < mensi> tcanapu = x1 (node/vertex/station) is backward of/along from x2 in oriented graph x3 (graph with orientation) using
05:14 < mensi> oriented edge path x4 (ordered sequence of ordered pairs; oriented edges). The path from x2 to x1 along the
05:14 < mensi> (now-unoriented version of the) edges used in x4 is counter/against/upstream of the orientation of x3 (and/or given by
05:14 < mensi> the oriented version of x4). |>>> Orientation is given from/by x3, so only an edge need be submitted if x3 is fully
05:14 < mensi> specified; if x3 is not fully specified, x4 can take the burden of specifying the orientation and subgraph of particular
05:14 < mensi> interest (namely, the two vertices x1 and x2, intervening vertices along the path, and the orientation of the given
05:14 < mensi> edges connecti...
05:14 < mensi> [mo'u se katna] http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/tcanapu
05:15 < gleki> looks like someone is living in some alien world and is desperately trying to explain it using human words
05:22 < Amnadya> xu do kakne loka stika la mabka tutci jahe lonu lo sance vreji cu pagbu
05:22 < gleki> oi oi oi
05:23 < gleki> i i'a i ko skicu
05:23 < gleki> i tai ma pagbu
05:23 < Amnadya> muha lo preti cu se pagbu lo se bacru jufra
05:24 < Amnadya> i jahebo kahe tirna jimpe ecre
05:26 < gleki> ua
05:26 < gleki> xm
05:26 < gleki> en: xm
05:26 < mensi> 48 da se tolcri: bixma'u, caxmati, gaxmolgle, laxma'i, rokybixmivborvelvi'u, sexmti, tixmamta, xadbixma'u, zansaxmu'e,
05:26 < mensi> banbuxumu, bangaxumu, bankuxumu, banmuxumu, banpuxumu, bansuxumu, bantuxumu, banxumu'a, banxumubu, banxumucu, banxumudu,
05:26 < mensi> banxumu'e, banxumufu, banxumugu, banxumuje, banxumuju, banxumuke, banxumuku, banxumulu, banxumumu, banxumunu, banxumu'o,
05:26 < mensi> banxumupu, banxumuru, banxumusu, banxumutu, banxumu'u, banxumuve, banxumuvu, banxumuxe, banxumuxu, banxumuzu, banzupuzu,
05:26 < mensi> baurnuxumu, besmamta, citnau, kanbyma'i, mivyvelvicyvauro'i, ro'irbi'o
05:26 < Amnadya> valsi - valsi, vs sance - valsi
05:27 < gleki> mi ba pensi
05:27 < Amnadya> i liha mi ja makaunoi pilno cu bilga loka finti lo sance vreji
05:27 < gleki> i mi lazni
05:27 < Amnadya> iha
05:27 < Amnadya> kihe pensi
05:28 < gleki> i ca ti mi na morjilo du'u lo krasi be la cilretci i ie ba'e mi pu finti
05:29 < gleki> i ua mi pu pilno la'oi JQuery
05:29 < gleki> i mi nelci i ie
05:29 < valsi> 38 results: sance, valsi, bangu, cmavo, cmene, gadri, gismu, jufra, rafsi, slaka…
05:33 < Amnadya> sihau lo prosumti cu nandyrai pagbu la itkuhile
05:33 < gleki> uesai
05:34 < gleki> i mi pu jinvi lo du'u rai frili
05:35 < Amnadya> lo sampu me ra cu frili ikuhi lo rafsi javni cu cfipu
05:35 < Amnadya> i na panra lo fadni selbri
05:36 < Amnadya> gaha do ma nandyrai
05:39 < gleki> lo ni rafsi
05:39 < gleki> e lonu lo rafsi cu cnegau lo tarmi be lo drata rafsi
05:39 < Amnadya> juho nandu
05:41 < Amnadya> ilaha la gredile 5 moi zohu lo nahe lazni remna cu nitcu tau zeha lo masti be li ci loka mohicli mohuku
05:42 < gleki> la'a krinu lo nu mi na ze'a lanli je tadni ibu
05:44 < Amnadya> y oi laha li ci na drani i li suho xa
05:44 < Amnadya> to dohe lo fadni remna toi
05:44 < gleki> xm
05:44 < gleki> i zo ze'a mabla
05:44 < gleki> i au ma'oi roi
05:44 < Amnadya> i rafsi fa 1728 da
05:45 < gleki> rafsi i'a i ku'i lo rafsi cu cnegau lo rafsi
05:45 < Amnadya> 1728 / 100 = 18 ca ro djedi
05:46 < Amnadya> i jaho jaha cumki fa tau zeha li ci
05:50 < Amnadya> i xamgu cipra i lo snada be tau la gredile mumoi cu lahasai snada tau lo drata gredile noi plujymeha
05:53 < Amnadya> i mani cinri do falosiho mi ciska pa lojbo brafiha jecu vecnu ri
05:55 < gleki> ainai mi te vecnu i sa'u mi te vecnu so'u da
05:55 < Amnadya> mi djuno
05:55 < gleki> i ku'i lo uenzi zo'u au no loujvo cu se pilno
05:55 < Amnadya> lol
05:55 < gleki> i sa'u mi na te vecnu lo cukta
05:55 < gleki> i mi rusko
05:55 < gleki> i lo'e rusko cu pilno lo torent
05:56 < gleki> i lo nu mi jmive zo'u pa proga pu'i se vecnu fi mi
05:56 < gleki> ije ze'a lo barda mi te vecnu no cukta
05:58 < gleki> i mi bilga lo ka stika la'e la alis i ku'imi na co'ei oi se'i
05:58 < Amnadya> lo preti pu nohe srana do noi pamei prenu kuho je srana fe rahu lonu da orginale lojbo brafiha je kahe se vecnu i nuho fasnu
05:58 < Amnadya> i sihau nohe cinri do
06:00 < gleki> so'i cinri cfika nu'o  se tcidu mi i mi na krici lo nu do ka'e finti lo cinri i fau lo nu do kakne vau y zo'u y na djuno u'i
06:00 < Amnadya> ko pensi do pohonai ko pensi lonu kahe cinri lo se cinri be lo jbobau beho poi zukpei loka tadni
06:01 < Amnadya> i lonu zasti fa suho brafiha kahe sidju
06:01 < Amnadya> fi loka jdice
06:02 < Amnadya> i mi caho gunka ci brafiha i mi friti loka pa lo ci brafiha cu se ciska bau lo jbobau
06:33 < Amnadya> noda frati...
06:35  * nuzba @Rodericus: @lirondos Por cierto, por si te interesa… Hay al menos una lengua en que esos juegos de palabras son imposibles: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban [http://bit.ly/1Hg7hhq]
06:38 < Ilmen> nodamafrati
06:48 < Amnadya> mi nakahe copypaste lo pu selsku sepiho lo fonxa
06:51 < niftg> .u'i zo copypaste ka'e se smuni zo'ei zo fukpu'i
06:52 < Ilmen> je'e .i ja'o mo'urívbi lokagánse fami
06:54  * nuzba @mochirial: http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/lookup.pl?Form=lookup.pl2&Database=*&Query=dinso    試験的gismuながら恐竜、正確には古代の大型爬虫類、ってありますね。中国語で恐竜は恐龙kǒnglóngなので英語のdinosaurまんまですね。 [http://bit.ly/1HMIkAs]
07:00 < gleki> Amnadya: re'i re'i
07:00 < gleki> Amnadya: ke'u mu'a zo brafi'a zo'u ki'u ma finti lo lujvo
07:01 < gleki> Amnadya: i au do jvocaufi'i
07:01 < niftg> .uo kavbu sepiho lo degji tahi lo nu degjai ku lo ckuliki sediho lo ri tuple .isekihubo mi na kakne co samciha yhybu noi cmamau
07:02 < Amnadya> pehi cizra se stidi doi la gleki
07:02 < Amnadya> tau lo gismu ku poho na banzu i tokpona simsa
07:03 < gleki> zo brafi'a zo'u ki'u ma
07:03 < gleki> y
07:03 < Amnadya> steci klesi lo cfika
07:04 < gleki> zo bracfika e'u
07:04 < gleki> zo bramlatu e zo brazamsi i'a ru'e e zo bracfika
07:06 < gleki> sa'ai zo braxamsi le'ai
07:07 < niftg> di'a apostrof zei samci'a kakne .i .a'o na pu'i raktu zunti lo ralju nu casnu
07:07 < niftg> fa ro tu'a mi
07:08 < xajmi> coi .i mi cmevla xajmi .i mi  tolsti lojban
07:08 < Ilmen> coi ckulikykalte
07:09 < niftg> coi za'u do mi'e pu'o ckulikycatra
07:10 < gleki> do famyma'o si terminatore
07:11 < samcinki> coi jai se tepsne be lo ro ckuliki
07:11 < gleki> Amnadya: e'uzo'oru'e do fanva la'e lu lo certu ce la margarita li'u lo lojbo
07:11 < gleki> i bracfika
07:12 < Ilmen> .a'e nai doi ka glare kei ko lo mi vacri cu cliva
07:12 < xajmi> mi tersmu nai "ckulikykalte"
07:13 < Ilmen> ckuliki'ykalte
07:13 < gleki> xu do na te smuni lu ckulikykalte li'u
07:14 < gleki> i li'a lo litki cukta cu rirci
07:14 < gleki> i na frili fa lo nu kalte lo litki cukta
07:15 < gleki> i e'e do troci
07:15 < niftg> .u'i snuti lujvo
07:16 < durka42> zo fardu gimkamsmikezypro zo pardu
07:17 < gleki> ie jungau
07:17 < gleki> sisi
07:17 < gleki> ei jungau
07:17 < durka42> vi'o
07:19 < gleki> i lo gismu canlu cu barda
07:19 < durka42> je'u
07:19 < niftg> .ua ma'i la camxes lo nu vimcu ybu noi na jai sarcu cu na sarcu lo nu lujvo vau vau ta'o
07:20 < durka42> ku'i xu roroi sarcu fa lo nu lo cnino gismu na janli ba'e ro nalselpilno gismu
07:21 < gleki> y
07:21 < gleki> ei le cecmu cu jdice
07:21 < durka42> go'i
07:21 < durka42> ta'o xu zo pardu cu se pilno
07:21 < gleki> i mu'a pe'i lo valsi be zo fardu ka'e vajni ja plixau
07:21 < durka42> la korpora cu .arco no da
07:22 < gleki> zo pardu puzi jai se stidi
07:22 < gleki> i pe'i zo pardu jai frili fai lo ka jai se morji
07:22 < gleki> i ku'i zo fardu cu lobykai valsi
07:22 < gleki> i seki'u bo pe'i na nabmi fa lonu cuxna lo drata tarmi
07:22 < gleki> i zo fardi mu'a
07:23 < gleki> vlaste: fardi (gimkai)
07:23 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/fardi
07:23 < gleki> y
07:23 < gleki> ta'i ma
07:23 < gleki> zukte lo cipra
07:23 < gleki> se pi'o la vlaste
07:25 < gleki> vlaste: fardi (gimka)
07:25 < vlaste> zo fardi gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo fardi gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
07:25 < gleki> vlaste: farde (gimka)
07:25 < vlaste> zo farde gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo farde gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
07:25 < gleki> lo canlu cu barda
07:27 < xajmi> xodor: https://chudleycannons.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/missinghodor.jpg
07:32 < xajmi> cmigau porpi
07:32 < xajmi> coi?
07:32 < xajmi> co'o
07:33 < gleki> co'oi
08:43 < ctefaho> Question of the day: do you guys pronounce "iancu" with or without denpa-bu before it?
08:59 < quintus> How would you translate english "even" in the sense of "emotive for exaspiration" as in "I don't even know what you're talking about"? I'm split between .u'inai and .ainai and .a'enai and .o'unai and .uanai
09:00 < quintus> of course any attitudinal would apply to the entire sentence
09:00 < quintus> not any individual word
09:01 < dutchie> quintus: attitudinals apply to the word
09:01 < dutchie> mi na djuno .uinai
09:01 < quintus> would apply to the whole sentence
09:02 < quintus> in {mi na djuno .uinai}, would .uinai not refer to the entire bridi?
09:02 < dutchie> no, that'd be {.uinai mi na djuno} or {mi na djuno vau .uinai}
09:02 < quintus> I thought vau+UI and central bridi+UI were identical
09:03 < dutchie> https://lojban.github.io/cll/13/9/
09:03 < quintus> reading currently
09:03 < dutchie> "the indicator (or group) attaches to the word immediately to its left, and indicates that the attitude is being expressed concerning the object or concept to which the word refers"
09:04 < Ilmen> ctefaho: I'd usually pronounce it without leading glottal stop, as the "i" would already be a consonant (glide)
09:05 < ctefaho> Ilmen: je'e. and in "lo jai bai iancu"?;)
09:06 < dutchie> as for your actual question, i'm not sure. possibly {ba'e} maybe?
09:06 < Ilmen> camxes: baiiancu
09:06 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "b" found.
09:07 < quintus> I don't remember where I read it, but I feel pretty sure that {.i mi dunda .ui ti do} and {.i .ui mi dunda ti do} and {.i mi dunda ti do vau .ui} were identical. I think the justification given was that since the main bridi denotes the relationship between the sumti, indicating emotions about the connection between the sumti is equivalent to indicating emotions about the entire bridi.
09:07 < quintus> Especially considering the meanings of "bridi"
09:07 < quintus> But yes this is not particularly relevant to my initial question
09:07 < Ilmen> Hm, I don't see why there would be a problem pronouncing it [baɪjánʃu], but otherwise you can add a ʔ here
09:07 < quintus> camxes: ba'e
09:07 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "b" found.
09:07 < Ilmen> @ ctefaho
09:07 < quintus> er, what's the bot command for jbo->en?
09:08 < dutchie> en:ba'e
09:08 < mensi> ba'e = [BAhE] forethought emphasis indicator; indicates next word is especially emphasized.
09:08 < ctefaho> Ilmen: well if [j] is legal for both bai and ian we get a double consonant
09:08 < quintus> .ua
09:09 < ctefaho> so I am gonna put denpa bu everywhere again now;)
09:09 < Ilmen> ctefaho: same with {ii}. [j] and [i] are allophones of the /i/ phoneme, you can use [j] to avoide double -ii- being pronounced as a long [i]
09:09 < dutchie> .u'i
09:09 < quintus> I feel like ba'e would be relevant in "So easy, even an end-user could use it!" but less so in "I don't even know what it is!"
09:10 < Ilmen> I guess you also should avoid pronouncing "ii" as a double [j] :)  @ctefaho
09:10 < ldlework> quintus: dunno I think bu'u djuno is similar
09:10 < Ilmen> (Anyway I usually don't pronounce {ai} as [aj])
09:11 < ctefaho> Ilmen: I more prefer [aɪ] and [aʊ] myself
09:11 < ldlework> quintus: though, it does seem like there is a sense of "sufficiency" with "even" in the english
09:11 < ldlework> Like "I don't even know what it means much less what it is for!"
09:11 < quintus> "much less" is another interesting construction
09:12 < ldlework> I wonder if ba'u is relevant
09:12 < quintus> I wonder if "even" and "much less" are  used often enough to denote a construction
09:12 < ldlework> mi na ba'u djuno
09:12 < ldlework> That I don't know, would be an understatement!
09:12 < Ilmen> en: .o'ocu'i
09:12 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
09:12 < quintus> z.b. "...don't even...much less..."
09:12 < ldlework> err rather, ba'unai
09:12 < Ilmen> en: o'ocu'i
09:12 < mensi> o'ocu'i = [UI*1] attitudinal: patience - mere tolerance - anger. |>>> officialdata
09:12 < ldlework> en: ba'u
09:12 < mensi> ba'u = [UI3] discursive: exaggeration - accuracy - understatement. |>>> See also satci, dukse. |>>>
09:12 < mensi> officialdata
09:12 < quintus> "neither...nor..."
09:13 < ldlework> .i ba'u nai mi na djuno "I don't even know"
09:13 < ldlework> Still not quite the same
09:14 <@xalbo> quintus: I'm fairly certain that an attitudinal after the main selbri just binds to the selbri itself. Certainly in practice that's how it's used, although the difference is usually pretty subtle. It's possible that CLL says otherwise, but I doubt it.
09:14 < ldlework> What about
09:14 < ldlework> en: be'u
09:14 < mensi> be'u = [UI5] attitudinal modifier: lack/need - presence/satisfaction - satiation. |>>> See also claxu, nitcu, mansa.
09:14 < mensi> |>>> officialdata
09:14 < ldlework> .i be'u mi na djuno
09:14 < ldlework> I don't know, and that's not enough.
09:14 <@xalbo> I've seen {ji'a} or {ji'a sai} used for other meanings of "even", and this might be the same, really.
09:15 < quintus> xalbo: I have no idea where I saw/read that; perhaps it was a non-xuncku more practical tutorial
09:15 < durka42> {mau} might be useful for the "much less" part
09:15 < quintus> but I'm certain I have
09:15 < ldlework> xalbo: I really think "I don't even know" is measure of sufficiency for some other thing
09:15 < ldlework> "How could I convince him. I don't even know him."
09:16 < quintus> I feel like that last one is slightly different
09:16 < gleki> I don't even know what you're talking about <-- do'a would be fine here imo
09:16 <@xalbo> {.i mi na djuno ji'a sai} being "Among the things I don't do, we can even go so far as to add knowing to them.", or "I don't even know."
09:16 < ldlework> "How can I give a sufficient answer? I don't even know what you're talking about."
09:16 < ldlework> Its totally a measure of sufficiency, pe'i
09:16 < quintus> My initial question was closer to gleki's use
09:16 < durka42> I don't even know him => I don't know him, and if I did it wouldn't help much
09:16 < quintus> it turns out words have multiple uses in natlangs and that it is hard to distinguish between them
09:17 < quintus> !quotable
09:17 < durka42> true fact :)
09:17 <@xalbo> Supercollider? I barely know 'er!
09:17 < ldlework> durka42: I don't see the context in which both of your sentences are swappable
09:17 < gleki> almost any English "cmavo" has numerous meanings
09:18 < dutchie> often as a "gismu" in its own right!
09:18 < dutchie> is/have etc
09:19 < ldlework> well at least brivla
09:20 < quintus> what's the difference between a brivla and a gismu?
09:20 < ldlework> brivla is the class of words that gismu belong to
09:20 < quintus> brivla can be combinations of gismu? xuncku?
09:20 < ldlework> along with lujvo and fu'ivla and so on
09:20 < ldlework> they are all predicates
09:21 < ldlework> of different morphological form
09:21 < quintus> gismu is the subset of brivla, as is lujvo and fu'ivla?
09:21 <@xalbo> {xuncku} is a lujvo, which is a brivla but doesn't gismu. The other class of brivla that aren't gismu are the fu'ivla, like {.irci}
09:21 < ldlework> gismu, lujvo, fu'ivla, zi'evla each denote a morphologocal type that belong to the class called "brivla" or "predicate words"
09:21 <@xalbo> quintus: Yes.
09:21 < quintus> okay thanks, I'm a bit rusty
09:22  * gleki and we havent even gotten to selbri/brivla distinction/confusion
09:23 < ldlework> That's not too hard
09:23 < ldlework> when we say "predicate words"
09:23 < ctefaho> ENTER BRODA
09:23  * ctefaho hides
09:23 < ldlework> we mean that, they produce grammatical "predicate terms"
09:24 < quintus> brod[aiueo]
09:24 < ldlework> So the words all share the property that when used, they produce "predicate terms" or "selbri", in the grammar, rather than the morphology.
09:24 < quintus> okay Saussure
09:25 < gleki> are you saus-sure?
09:25 < quintus> saus-positive
09:25 <@xalbo> quintus: "brivla" is a class of words based on how they're spelled (end in a consonant, have a least one consonant cluster). "selbri" is a what a word or a construct is doing in a sentence (acting like a verb).
09:25 < ldlework> Which can be shown by the fact that selbri can be composed from multiple words
09:26 < quintus> lo brivla cu brivla .i lo selbri cu se brivla
09:26 <@xalbo> The words {xagji} is always a brivla. The word {go'i} isn't. But in {mi xagji}, {xagji} acts as a selbri. In {mi go'i}, {go'i} acts as a selbri.
09:26 < dutchie> xalbo: you mean ending in a vowel
09:27 <@xalbo> dutchie: I do indeed. .o'a nai ro'a
09:27 < quintus> I'm out to lunch but I'll be back
09:28 < quintus> o/
09:31 < gleki> all DerSaidjin's issues found in la bangu dictionary are important, have to be and will be dealt with
09:34 < Ilmen> en: selbrivla
09:34 < mensi> selbrivla [< se bridi valsi ≈ 2nd conversion predicate word] = x1 is a lexically defined predicate word (predicate
09:34 < mensi> particles included), signifying relation x2 (n-ary property) in language x3 |>>> Encompasses gismu + lujvo + fu'ivla +
09:34 < mensi> brika'i. |>>> Ilmen
09:35 < gleki> jb: selbrivla
09:35 < mensi> selbrivla [< se bridi valsi ≈ Se* bridi* valsi*] = selbrivla — x1(text)  is a morphologically defined predicate word,
09:35 < mensi> verb word
09:35 < mensi> :lo selbrivla — verb word.
09:35 < mensi> :zo mlatu selbrivla — mlatu is a selbrivla.
09:35 < mensi> :Related words: lujvo, gismu, zi'evla, cmavo
10:13 < durka42> whoa, curtis used {ko'au}
10:17 < ctefaho> ^^
10:18 < durka42> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/comments.html?valsi=29243;natlangword=0;commentid=2203;definition=0
10:54 < gleki> en: ko'au
10:54 < mensi> ko'au = [BAI] kosmu modal, 1st place with purpose... |>>> See seko'au, kosmu, tezu'e, tepi'o, tefi'e, ki'u |>>>
10:54 < mensi> ctefaho
11:50  * nuzba @s_i_d_a: ca'o zvafa'i     .i a'o lo danmo cu     bevri loka badri    #lojban #tanka [http://bit.ly/1KTSUoq]
11:51 < gleki> ue
11:51 < durka42> mo
11:52 < durka42> ma uenmo do
11:53 < gleki> lo se bevri cu se ckaji
11:54 < gleki> https://github.com/pxg/Node-Rss-to-Twitter
11:55 < gleki> a'o ca da le cecmu co'a pilno la'e di'u lo nu benji lo uitki nuzba la tu'itrer
11:55 < gleki> si tu'iter
11:57  * nuzba @s_i_d_a: ca'o zvafa'i     .i a'o lo danmo cu     bevri loka badri    #lojban #haiku [http://bit.ly/1KTTsuC]
11:57  * nuzba @AscensionArcana: prelife: Before the start of life        ۞        zmadu: (Lojban) more; x1 exceeds/is more than x2 in property/quantity x3 (ka/ni) by amount/excess x4. [http://bit.ly/1KTTsL4]
12:07  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: mo'u finti / 書けました #はじロジ #ロジバン #lojban    18. 命令 http://cogas.github.io/hajiloji/article/nunctu/18.html    19. 関係詞 http://cogas.github.io/hajiloji/article/nunctu/19.html    20. 縛位詞（BE, BEI類） http://cogas.github.io/hajiloji/article/nunctu/20.html [http://bit.ly/1HhBzAh]
12:51 < Amnadya> coi
12:55 < Amnadya> lo mi cmene mi melbi
12:57  * nuzba @uitki: web Pages in Lojban - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/web_Pages_in_Lojban by Sorpaas [http://bit.ly/1eGKhRO]
13:01 < Amnadya> do mo doi cupleuup
13:09  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: えっ、すごい。http://tatoeba.org からjbo-en を検索できる sutsis ができている！　http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/muplis/index.html#sisku/ [http://bit.ly/1eGNv7T]
13:09 < durka42> coi Amnadya
13:09 < Amnadya> coi
13:13  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/ja/index.html    えええええ la sutysisku やばいなｗｗｗ lujvo 入れたらrafsi分解して gismu列を提示してくれるのかよｗｗ [http://bit.ly/1eGOy7L]
13:14 < Amnadya> do bazi klama la doitland
13:14 < Amnadya> iepei
13:14 < mensi> ei mi tugni
13:14 < Amnadya> doitclant
13:16 < Amnadya> la doihotcyguhe
13:16 < durka42> go'i
13:16 < durka42> cliva ca lo xavyplini djedi
13:16 < Amnadya> xu snada tau la duuolingos
13:17 < durka42> toldukse co jundi uinaise'i
13:17 < durka42> mi ka'e cusku lo se du'u mi na pinxe lo birje
13:17 < Amnadya> uinaidai i wo ist die toilette
13:18 < Amnadya> ko cusku tau lo birje
13:18 < ctefaho> Ich habe kein Kartoffeln
13:18  * ctefaho end of german knowledge
13:18 < Amnadya> potatis
13:18 < durka42> Ich das Bier trinkst nicht
13:18 < durka42> trinken*
13:19 < durka42> Mein Deutsch ist kaput
13:19 < Amnadya> ich trinke kein bier
13:19 < durka42> zo'oi kein mo
13:19 < Amnadya> zo no
13:20 < Amnadya> no tricu = kein Baum
13:20 < Amnadya> ija keine Bäume
13:20 < durka42> ua
13:22 < Amnadya> pehipei la duholingos cu zabna
13:24 < Amnadya> tahonai doi la cirko do klama xu la franfurt
13:25 < durka42> mi nelci la duuolingos
13:30 < Amnadya> ma ni lo duhu dahi mi cisj
13:30 < Amnadya> si
13:31 < Amnadya> ciska lo lojbo brafiha je cu vecnu ri
13:31 < Amnadya> cu cinri do
13:33 < durka42> da'i mi .erve lo'e lojbo brafi'a vau .u'i
13:33 < Amnadya> i vahi ruhe xu kanpe lonu lonu suda orginale ke lojbo brafiha je kahe se erve kahe xamgu la jboguhe
13:34 < Amnadya> uhi ui jehe
13:38 < Amnadya> mi xaho pu cusku fi la gleki fe lo seduhu mi caho gunka ci brafiha jecu friti loka pa lo ci brafiha cu se ciska bau lo jbobau
13:39 < Amnadya> i kuhi la gleki na pu se cinri
14:15 < Amnadya> smaji temci
14:28 < durka42> mi sutra sampla
14:28 < durka42> ei mulgau so'i da pu lo nu cliva
14:29 < Ilmen> de'u zo'u jijyni'i .e'u pei lodu lo drata poi jbopre cu kansa fi lo ka ciska
14:30 < Ilmen> ku soi se cpedu
14:30 < Ilmen> coi jundi .i ju'inai tolju'i
14:32 < Amnadya> na platu lonu lo drata cu kansa i puhi lifri lonu lo nu kansihu tau lo cfika cu seljahe lonu masno
14:32 < Ilmen> .i se'i lo nu fa gunka ca pa da fe ci cfika zo'u so'i mei
14:34 < Ilmen> .i je'e do'u lakne fa lonu mi fliba loka jimpe lodu makau .itlokuti lo ba'o se cusku
14:34 < Amnadya> kahe simlu i kuhi naku ro nu gunka cu nu ciska i sohi nu platu cu fasnu i ca lonu mohu platu lo lisri cu coha ciska
14:35 < Amnadya> i lonu capada ciska ci cohe cu nu mutce ikuhi lonu platu ci cohe cu cumki je na dukse loka nandu
14:35 < Ilmen> je'e .aivli
14:36 < Ilmen> di'ai pu'o ju ca'o finti
14:41 < Ilmen> .i mi toltce jeku'i ckaji loka xenru lonu lo pu nu lo jbopre za'umei cu kansi'u loka cfika finti cu se dicra .i ku'i faumlu mi fa lonu lo drata kansa puku ga co'u se cinri gi zukcfu dukse .i pu nandu fa tau lo nu ca ku za'u re da cu kansa sei frimo'i
14:44 < Amnadya> sihau
14:46 < Amnadya> ikuhi lo sidbo pu jalge lo miho nu cfika kansihu
14:46 < Amnadya> i mi pilno su lo sidbo
14:47 < Amnadya> zo maha*
14:48 < Amnadya> i frilymau faloka mi nahe se sidju mulgau
14:48 < Ilmen> lonu sugrute cusecupra cubanzu lonu punapalcau
14:49 < Amnadya> ie
14:50 < Ilmen> to
14:51 < Amnadya> zo to itkuhile
14:52 < Amnadya> i lu gau mi lihu smuni
14:52 < Ilmen> je'e cligau .i'o
14:54 < Ilmen> ni'o .e'i mi livmau seju canci nau
14:54 < Ilmen> co'o balgau
15:06  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: lojban、なんだかんだ見てると情報系の人は長続きしてないイメージある [http://bit.ly/1dMT9Vo]
15:11 < ldlework> zo dibdai for treasure?
15:15 < durka42> sure
15:17 < ldlework> je'e
15:18 < ldlework> lujvo in children's books, yay or nay?
15:19 < phma> depends
15:20 < phma> on how advanced the child is at learning the language and if the lujvo is one he's likely to have heard
15:20 < ldlework> its a children's book, so it would be read by multiple children
15:20 < ldlework> which do I use to guage?
15:20 < ldlework> but yeah, I guess you have to for some concepts
15:21 < ldlework> like find, in the sense of sispe'i
15:21 < ldlework> sisku penmi is .. just strange
15:21 < phma> what's it about, and how old are the children?
15:21 < ldlework> but somehow makes perfect sense as a lujvo
15:21 < ldlework> phma: think, like, one of the first book a child "reads"
15:21 < ldlework> so like See Spot Run, or similar
15:25 < phma> I wouldn't have a problem with sispe'i, would a child that age have problems pronouncing or hearing <lcr> in tolcri?
15:37  * nuzba @kaleidic: @eraserhd You must view Lojban as trying as hard as possible to take fun out of the world. [http://bit.ly/1HcjQeA]
15:48 < Amnadya2> xu la ilmen pu cusku suda mi ba tau zo grute
15:49  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
15:49 < ctefaho> co'o
15:51 < jenca> how do i say first, broda. then, brode. finally, brodi?
15:51 < Amnadya2> You can use "mai"
15:51 < Amnadya2> pamai remai romai
15:52 < phma> broda ce'o brode ce'o brodi
15:53 < ldlework> woah
15:53 < ldlework> does that work on bridi tails or just selbri or what
15:54 < jenca> ki’e
15:55 < Amnadya2> With selpahi connectives you can use it on briditails with ceho cu. ceho works as any other connective
15:55 < ldlework> its too bad there's no MOI-ish version
15:55 < ldlework> or some forethought version?
15:56 < ldlework> How would you represent the english speech, "First we gotta find some cash."
15:56 < Amnadya2> pamai
15:57 < ldlework> first utterance ordinal?
15:57 < ldlework> en: pamai
15:57 < mensi> pamai = [MAI*] discursive: first utterance ordinal. |>>> officialdata
15:57 < ldlework> en: mai
15:57 < mensi> mai = [MAI] utterance ordinal suffix; converts a number to an ordinal, such as an item or paragraph number. |>>>
15:57 < mensi> officialdata
15:57 < ldlework> I don't think that's the same
15:58 < ldlework> in the english, the force of "first" is to mark the sentence as logical dependency of some antecedent, I think
15:58 < ldlework> "Let's get something to eat." "First we gotta find some cash."
15:58 < ldlework> Its not really, "First, you're wrong. Second, I'm right!"
16:01 < xunlohu> I don't know the context, but I have seen the second statement used to make different points
16:04 < ldlework> yeah I can see that
16:30 < ldlework> strange no good word for "top"
16:35 < ldlework> Logically: "only X does Y" == "all Y are X"
16:35 < ldlework> is this true?
16:36 < ldlework> oh yeah
17:55 < cizypij> coi ro do
17:55 < durka42> coi
17:56 < cizypij> .i casnu ma
17:56 < durka42> so'u da za'a
17:58 < cizypij> .i zo'o ru'e pau nai da mo
18:01 < cizypij> ni'o xo ma mi ma zasti
18:11 < noname756> Where can i learn lojban?
18:14 < durka42> noname756: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Welcome!/en#Learning_Lojban
18:16 < noname756> ty ty
18:27 < phma> coi
18:27 < bigcentaur> coi
18:27 < phma> do mo pei
18:28 < bigcentaur> .i zo'o mi co'e
18:29 < phma> mi nitcu lo nu me'andi skagau .iku'i co'e
18:29 < durka42> coi
18:29 < phma> coi la durka
18:30 < durka42> coi zo bo zei retsku
18:31 < noname756> coi
18:33 < phma> zo bo zei retsku ki'a
18:33 < durka42> do pu retsku lo srana be zo bo
18:34 < phma> ua
18:35 < phma> bobobo-bo bo-bobo?
18:37 < durka42> jbonobo
18:40 < phma> xu lo jboia cu gunta lo jbonobo
18:40 < ldlework> Is there a reference of the cmavo related to liteary writing?
18:40 < ldlework> paragraphs and so on
18:40 < phma> like ni'o and no'i? what else?
18:41 < ldlework> That's what I'm asking
18:41 < phma> mai?
18:41 < durka42> make one!
18:42 < ldlework> Well I'm not really sure how they're used. Have we enumerated them just now?
18:42 < phma> ni'o and no'i both start paragraphs; no'i resumes the topic of a previous paragraph.
18:44 < durka42> yeah I guess so
18:44 < durka42> {ni'o pa mai} is common I think
18:44 < durka42> also you can iterate {ni'o} to make different levels of headings
18:44 < durka42> ni'o ni'o ni'o pa mai
18:44 < ldlework> can you mark a title?
18:44 < ldlework> would "$the_title zo'u:" be a neat convention for chapter titles?
18:45 < durka42> could work
18:45 < durka42> you can also just use the first jufra after ni'o
18:45 < phma> I've put just "ni'o <title>" in bold
18:45 < ldlework> I like that ni'o actually denotes the paragraph
18:46 < ldlework> whereas I might style a chapter heading above
18:47 < ldlework> phma: are you saying you style that as a title above the text?
18:47 < ldlework> or inline with the text?
18:47 < phma> on a line by itself, this is a section heading, not a chapter heading
18:48 < ldlework> What about chapter headings?
18:48 < phma> This was on Wikipedia; there is no chapter in an article.
18:48 < durka42> the other question, is {ni'o ni'o} a larger or smaller heading?
18:49 < phma> a ni'oni'o section is bigger than a ni'o section
18:49 < ldlework> I can't bring myself to merely reiterate an article like that
18:49 < phma> of course you can say "ni'ono'ini'o" and confuse people
18:50 < ldlework> it seems brutish
18:50 < phma> what do you mean, reiterate an article?
18:50 < ldlework> ni'oni'o
18:51 < phma> "ni'o" isn't an article
18:51 < ldlework> oh boy
18:51 < phma> it's a new topic marker
18:51 < durka42> it isn't
18:51 < durka42> but also, why not?
18:52 < phma> "le" is an article
18:52 < durka42> it seems better than defining separate cmavo for h1 .. h9
18:52 < phma> "ni'o gerku cu blabi ni'o mlatu" is ungrammatical
18:53 < phma> "le gerku cu blabi le mlatu" is grammatical
18:53 < ldlework> durka42: except to get h1 you need 9 repetitions?
18:53 < ldlework> phma: I get it...
18:54 < ldlework> I know what a noun-phrase determiner is and what it does
18:54 < durka42> ldlework: well it's just relative to the other sections in the same document
18:56 < ldlework> I just can't seem to take the idea of saying ni'oni'oni'o seriously
18:56 < durka42> ok, don't
18:56 < durka42> nobody is making you do it
18:56 < ldlework> I didn't say anyone is
18:56 < ldlework> I'm remarking, as one does in a place like this
18:56 < ldlework> Did I remark wrongly?
18:59 < ldlework> phma: bad habit of using 'article' to mean non-predicate word
19:06 < phma> coi clakre .i xu do cmima la me ly.y'ybucy
19:13 < ldlework> is "fraug" the closest one can get for a lojbanization of "frog"?
19:14 < durka42> I'd say {frag}
19:16 < ldlework> "tod" for "toad" ?
19:16 < durka42> ie
19:24 < ldlework> what if
19:24 < ldlework> lu broda li'u se cusku ko'a fa lu brode li'u
19:25 < durka42> ii
19:25 < durka42> xu do djica lo nu lo munje cu spoja
19:25 < ldlework> lu ko cikna li'u se cusku ko'a fa lu do ba zi jai lerci li'u
19:26 < durka42> mi na jimpe
19:26 < ldlework> oh well thought it might be intuitive
19:27 < durka42> you're using the interpretation where FA-ing an already filled place inserts a {je}?
19:27 < ldlework> yeah
19:27 < durka42> I mean I figured it out
19:28 < ldlework> Is this an established interpretation?
19:29 < durka42> it's one of them
19:30 < ldlework> Do you know if any others are more popular? I haven't really noticed much about FA-ing filled stuff.
21:40  * nuzba @AscensionArcana: I Was Born On The Day Before Yesterday.        https://youtu.be/G3U0wpL-CEg        prulamdei: (Lojban) yesterday; x₁ is the day before x₂ in day-standard x₃ [http://bit.ly/1NUDuAq]
22:26  * nuzba @jbojufbotjpn: lo cmene pe lo prije pendo be mi cu smuni zo zifre bau lo jbobau / 私の賢い友人の名前はロジバンで自由という意味です。 (770535) [http://bit.ly/1NPYmb9]
23:55 < gleki> Amnadya2: coi mi'e me lo lojbo jatna i pei LLG pleji fi do fo lo nu do favgau CLL
--- Day changed Thu Jul 09 2015
00:03 < Amnadya2> xu do basti la lojbab loka jatna lylygy
00:03 < Amnadya2> xu la and cohu djica
00:04 < Amnadya2> iji poho do cmina lo ralju kamni zaho
00:05 < ldlework> melbi https://play.spotify.com/track/4BLXtLRfhp6GFT9M6aa4Kd
00:06 < Amnadya2> i xuna cizra falonu do jatna i do jinvi lodu lylygy palcau
00:07 < gleki> Amnadya2: mi me lo jatna i naku su'e pa jatna cu zasti
00:09 < gleki> i lylygy claxu lo prali be mi i ku'i lo nu LLG pleji fi do zo'u mo
00:09 < Amnadya2> iepei lonu do cmima lo ralju kamni na nuzba
00:09 < mensi> mi tugni i ie mi tugni
00:09 < gleki> ie na nuzba
00:09 < gleki> i ta'onai i'apei mi cpedu lo nu LLG pleji fi do
00:10 < Amnadya2> mi na djuno i bahanai lylygy na kakne
00:10 < gleki> i sa'u do puzi djica lo nu vecnu i ja'o do se cinri lo kate pleji
00:10 < Amnadya2> gohi
00:10 < gleki> i da'i do cpedu tu'a xo rupnu
00:11 < Amnadya2> uhe i mi puzisai coha cikna
00:11 < gleki> fi'i cikna
00:12 < gleki> i do me si du lo BPFK jatna i ja'o do bilga lo ka kurji i pe'i LLG kakne lo ka su'ova'ei jdini sidju do
00:13 < Amnadya2> cylyly xi papipa na jibri bypyfyky
00:13 < Amnadya2> i mi ma gunka dahi
00:14 < Amnadya2> i pleji fo ma
00:14 < gleki> lo nu do cikre lo mabla pagbu be CLL gi'a vimcu lo mabla pagbu i pe'i mutce srana BPFK
00:15 < Amnadya2> lonu cikre je lonu vimcu na pagbu tau cylyly papipa
00:16 < gleki> i ku'i lo nu do me BPFK jatna zo'u na mutce vajni i sa'u do jbopre gi'e jbocre gi'e kakne lo ka gunka i ku'i do ca'a na gunka i ja'o mo i ja'o cumki fa lo nu lo nu LLG pleji fi do cu rinka lo nu CLL zenba lo ka prane
00:16 < gleki> i ie na srana la'a CLL papi pa
00:16 < gleki> i ja'o CLL re pi no zo'u mo i da'i xu do tugni
00:16 < Amnadya2> mi na na gunka i gunka soho lojbo noi iha na srana lylygy
00:17 < gleki> da'i xu do bredi lo ka te pleji fo CLL
00:18 < Amnadya2> cumki vahlonu djuno loduhu makau ve pleji jeloduhu makau pleji morna
00:18 < gleki> xm
00:18 < Amnadya2> i kuhi uhi mi zaho senpi lodu lylygy kakne
00:18 < gleki> i ma jdice lo du'u makau ei se vimcu gi'a se cikre
00:19 < Amnadya2> bypyfyky
00:19 < gleki> Amnadya2: na vajni fa lo nu do senpi i mi ji'a su'ova'ei senpi i ku'i mi na nupre i mi djica lo ka troci
00:19 < Amnadya2> jehe
00:20 < gleki> mu'a lo nu cikre lo srana be lo sko'opu ce la xorlo zo'u LLG pleji bazi lo nu do mo'u cikre zo'u ei pleji ma
00:20 < gleki> i ku'i xu na ku do jdice lo du'u makau cu jai sarcu fai lo ka pamoi se cikre
00:20 < Amnadya2> iha pei mi zeha pensi
00:21 < gleki> iha iha
00:21 < gleki> i ta'o mi ca zgana la terminator
00:21 < gleki> xi y 2015
00:21 < gleki> i mabla
00:21 < Amnadya2> ue do catlu suho skina
00:22 < gleki> i no'e cinri
00:22 < Amnadya2> uenai na cinri
00:22 < gleki> i lo se lisri cu rapli 
00:37 < gleki> i u'i la cilretci ku noi mabla tutci cu cinri be mi zmadu la terminator
00:37 < Amnadya2> uhi
00:38 < gleki> i sa'u mi turni la cilretci i mi na turni lo mabla skina
00:41 < Amnadya2> la famymaho zoho
00:41 < gleki> i la'a lu la cilretci cu cinri zmadu do li'u ka'e lobykai te rekto
00:51 < Amnadya2> ithkuil: ňato
00:52 < gleki> na jundi
00:52 < Amnadya2> zaha
00:54 < Amnadya2> xu na ambigu
00:55 < Amnadya2> i laha mi na jimpe fi lo itkuhile prosumti
00:57 < gleki> na djuno
00:57 < gleki> i xu do ca'o surla ne'a lo xamsi
00:59 < Amnadya2> vreta lo ckana i vlile brife ca lo cabdei
01:00 < gleki> e'u do surla gi'enai jbozu'e ja itkuiile'yzu'e
01:00 < Amnadya2> ňatowa
01:01 < Amnadya2> mi na kahe zukte noda
01:01 < Amnadya2> i loka itkuhile tadni cu se surla
01:03 < gleki> fenki
01:04 < Amnadya2> liha mi lazni jiha i cadzu i zutse lo canre i liho
01:06 < Amnadya2> i jihi noda fasnu i mi nelci
01:07 < gleki> e'e doi la mensi ko kansa la amnadiia
01:48 < tsani> coi
01:52 < ldlework> coi banli foldi be lo glare vacri
01:53 < ldlework> hehe, long time
01:56 < ldlework> well you were not actually hot today, surprisingly
01:56 < ldlework> first drizzle in a while
02:06 < gleki> ko fanva fi lo lojbo ca ti
02:06 < gleki> i lo me'oi drizzle cu mo
02:08 < gleki> .dict drizzle
02:08 < fenki> drizzle — noun: 1. Light rain, 2. (physics, weather). Very small, numerous, and uniformly dispersed water drops, mist, or sprinkle. Unlike fog droplets, drizzle falls to the ground. It is sometimes accompanied by low visibility and fog — verb: 1. (trans., intransitive) To rain lightly; to s[...]
02:08 < gleki> xu lo linto poi carvi
02:09 < gleki> i sicpi lo linto vau la'a
02:10 < gleki> phma: http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/comments.html?valsi=8442;natlangword=0;commentid=0;definition=15066
02:38 < gleki> i think i should write another scriptfor mass uploading real sentences to Tatoeba
02:38 < gleki> this is how we can quickly increase the number of lojbna sentences there
03:15 < tsani> gleki: .i .ei zo'o la cadgu'a cu pilno zo drisle
03:17 < tsani> ldlework: .i zo'o ko vitke fi lo kadno .i lo bu'u tsani ca lo crisa na gladu'e vau ui ui nai
03:17 < tsani> .ije mi tolmo'i lo du'u do makau xabju .i la .kolorados. xu
03:26 < ctefaho> coi lo tsani
03:27 < gleki> coi lo blanu galtu
03:31 < latro`a_> coi
03:32 < Amnadya2> coi lo jbini be lo terdi joi lo kensa
03:38  * nuzba @uitki: ASCII table keys names - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ASCII_table_keys_names by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1HkfRvr]
04:03 < gleki> Pirahã is considered a "primitive" language where it is very difficult to express many concepts (it's more restrictive than toki pona). For example, the Pirahã can't count as they have no concept of quantity. They have no tenses, few kinship terms, and only have color terms for "light" and "dark". Ithkuil on the other hand is an incredibly "efficient" language where a speaker can express many things withou
04:03 < gleki> t difficulty.
04:03 < gleki> Pretty much, a Pirahã-Ithkuil creole would be like trying to merge a canoe and an aircraft carrier.
04:05 < gleki> </quote>
04:31 < Ilmen> I think I've read that Pirahã has no lexical word for colors other than light/dark, but that there are other means to express other colors (with several words? I don't remember).
04:35 < Ilmen> In Japanese, a good deal of colors names are made with the name of a thing having this color plus a -iro suffix meaning "color"; for example, "mizuiro" (water color) and "kitsuneiro" (fox color); so I wouldn't be surprised it they use something similar
04:35 < gleki> i suppose prototyping is what is always used
04:35 < gleki> Homer used the same system
04:36 < gleki> they mixed rainbow colors with other properties of objects
04:36 < gleki> pure rainbow system is a pretty late invention
04:36 < Ilmen> je'e
04:36 < gleki> i perceive {skari2} as a prototype
04:37 < Ilmen> ni'o mi de'a jundi
04:37 < gleki> jb: skari
04:37 < mensi> skari = skari — x1(entity)  is of colour  x2(entity)  as perceived by observer  x3(entity)
04:37 < mensi> :lo skari — coloured, colored. lo se skari — colour, color.
04:37 < mensi> :le dacti cu skari lo xunre — It is colored red.
04:37 < mensi> :le flora cu skari lo tsani mi — To me the flower has the color of the sky.
04:37 < mensi> :Comment: x2 is the prototype having the color, e.g. lo tsani (sky) or lo xunre (red)
04:37 < mensi> :Related words: blanu, bunre, cicna, cinta, crino, grusi, narju, nukni, pelxu, xunre, zirpu, carmi, kandi, xekri,
04:37 < mensi> blabi
04:54 < gleki> heh, semantical list of roots in ithkuil https://www.reddit.com/r/Ithkuil/comments/3btk55/list_of_roots_by_categorytheme/
04:54 < gleki> much better
04:55 < gleki> both for upper ontology dictionary and for learningithkuil
04:56 < Amnadya2> claxu lo 80 cnino gismu
04:57 < gleki> e'e do jungau la kerest
04:57 < Amnadya2> ca lo xavdei
04:57 < gleki> to la gleki co'a ta'e pilno zo e'e toi
04:59 < gleki> xm. i dont like this list since it doesnt explain patterns and stems with their meanings
04:59 < Amnadya2> ie i lo stem liste cu plixauvdahi
04:59 < Amnadya2> plixau dahi
05:02 < gleki> maybe i dont understand something but the list is very short
05:02 < Amnadya2> ie
05:02 < gleki> lo gimste ci barda zmadu
05:03 < Amnadya2> laha na se pagbu lo nahe tanxe gismu
05:03 < gleki> ua
05:03 < Amnadya2> ikuhi mi nasai birti
05:05 < Amnadya2> i liha lo gimste cu brazma
05:05 < Amnadya2> jihi 800 da itkuhile gismu
05:05 < gleki> i ie so'i lo ralrafsi si me'oi root su se claxu
05:06 < Amnadya2> noda itkuhile uitki
05:06 < Amnadya2> i nandu faloka kansihu loka jajgau lo datni
05:06 < Amnadya2> i gugykgredile poho
05:07 < Amnadya2> gugyl
05:07 < gleki> e'a do pilno lo lojbo uitki
05:08 < gleki> i ku'i lo uitki cu mabla lo ka jajgau lo se stura datni
05:08 < gleki> i lo gugle gredile cu pluka zmadu
05:10 < Amnadya2> na pluka mi i kuhi laha praktikale traji
05:15 < gleki> pluka be mi zmadu lo uitki
05:44 < Amnadya2> ei suda itkuhile panra la vlasisku
05:46 < gleki> y
05:46 < gleki> na nabmi
05:46 < gleki> i la sutysisku ca vlipa dunli la vlasisku
05:46 < gleki> i dunli ja zmadu
05:46 < gleki> i ku'i mi nitcu lo datni
05:46 < gleki> i au da zbasu lo XML vreji e lo simsa
05:46 < Amnadya2> jehe
05:46 < gleki> i ca ti lo itkuiile vlaste na zati gi'a mabla
05:46 < gleki> *zasti
05:48 < gleki> exp: na zasti gi'a mabla
05:49 < gleki> a'o zo na sko'opu na'e citka zo mabla
05:49 < mensi> ([CU {na zasti} VAU] [gi'a {CU <mabla VAU>} VAU])
05:49 < gleki> za'a na citka i ku'i la ilmentufa na kaken tu'a lo sko'opu
05:49 < Amnadya2> na citka
05:49 < gleki> *kakne
05:49 < gleki> i ja'o dunli lu zasti na gi'a mabla li'u
05:53  * nuzba @mochirial: ロジバンだと「吹く」は「風」brifeを使って表します。    x1はx2（起源）・x3（速度）の風； x1はx2から吹く； x2はx1を吹く    x2は方角も。    http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/lookup.pl?Form=lookup.pl2&Database=*&Query=brife [http://bit.ly/1NVBWpA]
05:58 < Amnadya2> taho zahu 12kiho da stem
05:59 < gleki> xe'e'e
05:59 < gleki> i sampu bangu
06:01 < Amnadya2> dohanai na cunso
06:41  * la_kristan may become disconnected at any time, without warning (to you or herself)
06:42 < la_kristan> coi
06:43 < la_kristan> .i xu su'o lo prenu cu zvati
06:44 < la_kristan> :-(
06:46 < ctefaho> I'm kinda zvati
06:47 < la_kristan> kinda zvati, ey?
06:48 < ctefaho> I had forgotten someone had made kinda a gismu
06:48 < la_kristan> well, that's more response than I'm getting from #tokipona
06:48 < la_kristan> oh, is it?
06:48 < ctefaho> and sorta
06:48 < ctefaho> lel
06:49 < ctefaho> well they are "joke gismu"
06:49 < la_kristan> like besto?
06:50 < ctefaho> yes
06:50 < la_kristan> ah.
06:50 < la_kristan> very useful.
06:50 < ctefaho> mi kinda sorta klama
06:51 < la_kristan> mi kinda sorta besto
06:52 < ctefaho> you win
06:52  * ctefaho hands la_kristan the price of the day
06:52 < la_kristan> whatever
06:54 < ctefaho> mi kinda sorta besto cribe
06:54 < la_kristan> but at least the definitions of those words don't take up a whole page...
06:55 < la_kristan> djuno the capital of Alaska?
06:57 < la_kristan> sorry, now that I've finished the exercises in L4B, I don't know what to do with myself.
06:59  * la_kristan pu mo'u tcidu fi la'o gy. Lojban for Beginners .gy .e la'o gy. The Complete Lojban Language .gy.
07:00 < ctefaho> have you read le cmalu noltru?
07:00 < ctefaho> it could be a good "target" to be able to read it
07:01 < ctefaho> (is at http://mw.lojban.org/papri/le_cmalu_noltru )
07:02 < la_kristan> okay, I'm looking...
07:03 < ctefaho> you haven't read The Little Prince before have you?
07:03 < la_kristan> no, I haven't
07:04 < ctefaho> hmm
07:04 < ctefaho> what about The Metamorphisis?
07:05 < la_kristan> haven't heard of that one...
07:06 < ctefaho> one of Kafka's works
07:06 < gleki> {kinda} is an important gismu in my opinion no matter what *kind of* history it has
07:07 < ctefaho> COUGH MALGLI COUGH
07:07 < la_kristan> I just sit around reading djemynai lyrics, which may not be beneficial...
07:07 < ctefaho> very beneficial if they make you adapt ce-ki-tau-jau ;)
07:07 < la_kristan> I don
07:08 < la_kristan> ah! stupid phone!
07:08 < la_kristan> I don't consider that benefit, really...
07:09 < gleki> well, you are free to rephrase {kinda} using other words. xu do kakne
07:09 < ctefaho> well I am the guy making his own dialect so you probably shouldn't listen to me too much:p
07:09 < la_kristan> and when I can't figure out what he's saying, because his cmavo are weird...
07:10 < gleki> that's the problem
07:10 < gleki> with these splinter dialects
07:11 < la_kristan> I speak my own dialect of English, and everyone understands me...
07:11 < la_kristan> but English was vague anyway.
07:13 < la_kristan> Except, maybe the guy from Belgium, whom I PMed the other day; I'm not sure my message was intelligible.
07:13 < la_kristan> oh well.
07:14 < la_kristan> how do you say "I read about [something]"?
07:15 < menli> la_kristan: {mi tcidu lo srana}
07:17  * ctefaho co'oru'e
07:17  * nuzba @uitki: ಲೊಜ್ಬಾನ್ - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/%E0%B2%B2%E0%B3%8A%E0%B2%9C%E0%B3%8D%E0%B2%AC%E0%B2%BE%E0%B2%A8%E0%B3%8D by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1KRarPQ]
07:17  * nuzba @uitki: लोज्बान - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/%E0%A4%B2%E0%A5%8B%E0%A4%9C%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AC%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A8 by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1SaUToP]
07:18 < la_kristan> how does the something fit in?
07:18 < la_kristan> ctefa'o: see ya
07:18 < menli> Oh, I thought you wanted it to be left to context.
07:18 < menli> {tcidu lo srana be X}, {tcidu tu'a X}
07:19 < la_kristan> ki'e
07:19 < menli> "about X" as a predicate argument is usually {tu'a X}
07:22 < la_kristan> .i mi tcidu tu'a la'o gy. dotside .gy.
07:24 < xajmi> coi...
07:24 < la_kristan> coi
07:25 < xajmi> I would like to translate the "little red riding hood" tale as a practice in lojban... and i want to know if this is how it is said:
07:25 < xajmi> xunre sedgai lo muvzva cmalu ku
07:26 < la_kristan> I don't know; I'm barely out of the beginner course.
07:27 < xajmi> really? me too
07:27 < Ilmen> Le Petit Chaperon Rouge?
07:27 < xajmi> that same
07:27 < xajmi> although that is in french
07:28 < xajmi> as a guide here are the meanings of each word:xunre = x1 is red
07:29 < xajmi> sedgai = x1 is a hood (headwear) covering x2
07:29 < xajmi> muvzva = x1 wanders in area x2
07:30 < xajmi> cmalu = x1 is smal in dimension x2 compared to x3
07:30 < xajmi> lo ... ku transforms selbri into sumti
07:30 < xajmi> I think it is well translated but i'm not sure
07:31 < Ilmen> en: muvzva
07:31 < Ilmen> vlaste: muvzva
07:31 < vlaste> muvzva = x1 wanders within an area x2.
07:31 < la_kristan> .i mi cilre ledu'u zo le cu lidna zo du'u kei la .lojban. la'o gy. Lojban for beginners .gy lenu mi tcidu
07:31 < mensi> muvzva [< muvdu zvati ≈ Move at] = x1 wanders within an area x2. |>>> muvdu zvati |>>>
07:31 < mensi> gusnikantu
07:32 < Ilmen> I'd translate the French title as {la cmalu ke xunre ke muvzva sedgai}, maybe
07:32 < la_kristan> trying to fill all the places of "cilre"; I think I got it...
07:32 < Ilmen> Although I'm unsure about how to best translate "chaperon"
07:34 < xajmi> chaperon means "hood (headwear)" right?
07:34 < Ilmen> I speak French, but "chaperon" is really a rare word, so I'll check on Witkionary
07:35 < Rodericus> Besides English, other languages in which I've seen the title only have: (article +) a combination of a diminutive of “hood” and “red”.  Is there another version similar to the English one?
07:35 < Ilmen> Yeah, originally it means "hood"/"head covering"
07:36 < la_kristan> I'd translate the title as "ruĝkapuĉulineto", because that's how I roll.
07:37 < Ilmen> How about simply {la cmalu ke xunre se sedgai}?
07:37 < Ilmen> "The small red-hooded"
07:37 < la_kristan> which reminds me (don't ask me why), what does "balnema" mean?
07:38 < Ilmen> Whale.
07:38 < Ilmen> vlaste: balnema
07:38 < vlaste> balnema = x1 is a baleen whale of species x2
07:38 < la_kristan> whale!
07:38 < la_kristan> fascinating song title that!
07:39 < xajmi> then "chaperon (french) = hood = sedgai (lojban)"
07:40 < la_kristan> it looked to me like a description of something with a tendency to balni... but I figured that wasn't it.
07:40 < Ilmen> In modern French "hood" is "capuche", as a side note. I've never heard the word "chaperon" outside this story :)
07:40 < la_kristan> oh!
07:41 < la_kristan> so that's where "kapuĉo" comes from!
07:41 < xajmi> LOL thanks limen
07:42  * la_kristan does not speak French...
07:42 < xajmi> in spanish "caperusa" is the word used in the tale but the most comon word is "capucha" in modern spanish
07:43 < Ilmen> ua
07:43 < la_kristan> a cognate, then...
07:43 < la_kristan> mi español es muy malo.
07:44 < xajmi> spanish is my mother tongue... so... yeah
07:44 < xajmi> *mother language
07:45 < Ilmen> Mio esta muy oxidado  (ay, no puedo añadir el tilde ahora)
07:45 < la_kristan> english is mine, much to my dismay...
07:45 < xajmi> not to worry... 90% of the internet is in english so... you can learn almost anything if you already know english
07:45 < Ilmen> Very nice, I haven't seen a native Spanish speaker visiting #lojban for quite a while ^^
07:46 < xajmi> ki'e do (thank you)
07:47 < la_kristan> mi volas forĵeti la anglan entute, kaj paroli Esperanton dum la resto de mia vivo!
07:47 < Ilmen> unfortunadamente la mayoria de los materiales lojbanes no estan taducido al español, es muy probablemente la razon principale
07:48 < la_kristan> toki Inli li ike mute mute mute tawa mi!!!
07:50 < durka42> mi se bangu lo spano .iku'i na'e pamoi co bangu
07:50 < xajmi> It is also because lojban is really geeky (I'm just being honest)...
07:51  * Ilmen wants their Linux back to be able to type the acute accent
07:51 < la_kristan> ми уиле е ни: ми токи е токи пона кепекен сителен Лоси.
07:52 < xajmi> I don't understand a single word in russian
07:52 < la_kristan> сителен Лоси ли пона тауа ми!
07:52 < gleki> once our russian group translated Waves to Russian and the japanese subcommunity translated them to Japanese. Also one French guy translated them to French. I guess that's mostly it
07:52 < la_kristan> it's not Russian...
07:53 < gleki> im talking about Wave Lessons
07:53 < xajmi> ukranian?
07:53 < la_kristan> it's just toki pona in Cyrillic letters.
07:53 < gleki> ми ша тавла бау ла ложбан
07:54 < la_kristan> .и ми го'и
07:54 < xajmi> what on earth is "toki pona"
07:54 < xajmi> ?
07:54 < durka42> another conlang
07:54 < xajmi> oh... weird
07:54 < Ilmen> A minimalistic-issim philosiphical conlang
07:54 < Ilmen> With about 100 words
07:55 < la_kristan> "the language of good"
07:55 < la_kristan> hence the name;
07:55 < xajmi> oh... amazing
07:55 < la_kristan> toki = talk, language
07:55 < gleki> toki: Lojban
07:55 < mensi> lojban = toki Losupan. en la toki pona. taso la toki pona ala
07:56 < durka42> toki: language
07:56 < mensi> 11 da se tolcri: toki, toki Inli li pona., toki Kanse, sona e toki, sona pona e toki, toki li pona tawa mi., toki lon
07:56 < mensi> toki, toki nanpa wan, toki pona e toki, toki pona li toki pona., toki sitelen
07:56 < la_kristan> pona = good, simple
07:56 < xajmi> da faq???
07:57 < xajmi> jajajaja
07:57 < durka42> ?
07:57 < Ilmen> .u'i
07:57 < clakre> jajaja is not what you want in here u'i
07:57 < xajmi> u'i
07:57 < clakre> u'i or xaxaxa instead :)
07:58 < gleki> jajaja. jejeje. je'ije'ije'i. jojojo. jujuju
07:58 <@xalbo> Now I need to try to come up with a context where {jajaja} would be grammatical. I'm not sure that's possible without magic...
07:58 < xajmi> i'm sorry, but "toki nanpa wan, toki pona e toki, toki pona li toki pona" isn't what we want either, and yet here it is... u'i
07:58 < clakre> la gleku pu spofu la mensi!
07:58 < clakre> zo'o
07:59 < Ilmen> zo spogau .e'u
07:59 < gleki> mi jai gau spofu fai la mensi
07:59 < Ilmen> zo gleki .e'u ji'a
07:59 < gleki> i gau mi spofu fa la mensi
07:59 < gleki> i gau mi la mensi co'a spofu
07:59 <@xalbo> (magic being something like {me zo ja ja ja zei co'e})
07:59 < clakre> u'i
08:00 < gleki> me zo ja ja ja zei xajmi
08:00 < la_kristan> speaking of which, djemynai's connectives look weird to me.
08:01 < gleki> what were they?
08:01 < durka42> he is using this set http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/how-to-substantially-simplify-the-lojban-connective-system-my-connective-system
08:01 < gleki> {je cu} probably?
08:01 < Ilmen> {ga ja} too
08:01 < la_kristan> yeah, je cu, and stuff.
08:01 < Ilmen> I have the feeling of having heard {gu ja} too, but I hope I just misheard
08:01 < gleki> je cu can be replaced with {gi'e}
08:02 <@xalbo> Ilmen: I think {gu ja} may be forethought tanru-internal, but I'm not sure.
08:02 < durka42> Ilmen: guja is {gu'a}, right? though {gu} seems to have been missed when JACU was added to camxes
08:02 < Ilmen> Ah
08:02 < Ilmen> Didn't remember of the existence of GUhA.
08:03 < durka42> possibly the least used connective?
08:03 < durka42> fighting for that title with ZIhE, ba'a
08:03 < Ilmen> li'a
08:03 < xajmi> sorry. I got lost here... I don't know that much lojban... but perhaps now someone could help me?
08:03 < durka42> sidju do ma
08:04 < Ilmen> Sure. No vacila en preguntar
08:04 < Ilmen> se tienes preguntas
08:04 < Ilmen> *si
08:04 < xajmi> I want to translate the "little red riding hood" tale to lojban as practice, and I want to know if ot is well said "xunre sedgai lo muvzva cmalu ku"
08:04  * Ilmen has their Esperanto interfering with Spanish again >_<
08:04 < xajmi> u'i limen
08:05 < durka42> A red hat covers the wandering small-thing.
08:05 < xajmi> so what would be a better translation?
08:06 < Ilmen> {la cmalu ke xunre se sedgai}, I suggest.
08:06 < durka42> are you going for a sentence or a noun-phrase?
08:06 < Ilmen> "The small red-hooded one"
08:06 < durka42> .i'e Ilmen
08:06 < xajmi> A noun-phrase "the little red riding hood
08:06 < gleki> i think {je} instead of {ke} can also work there but we are delving into details here
08:07 < Ilmen> gleki: with "se sedgai", I think it would mean that the hood is small
08:08 < Ilmen> {lo cmalu se sedgai be lo xunre} ---> {la cmalu ke xunre se sedgai}
08:08 < Ilmen> ie nai pei
08:08 < mensi> ei mi tugni
08:08 < gleki> i invented my own cekitaujau dialect. and already implemented it in a parser.
08:09 < Ilmen> xajmi: {la + selbri} = the one(s) named [selbri...]
08:09 < gleki> it's called ..........
08:09 < gleki> li !
08:09 < Ilmen> xajmi: la se sedgai = The hooded one(s)
08:09 < gleki> alta: mi li monsuta
08:09 < mensi> ([FA mi] [li {monsuta NF} VAU])
08:09 < Ilmen> hmm
08:10 < Ilmen> maybe {la cmalu se ke xunre sedgai} would be better actually, if we're nitpicking
08:11 < xajmi> lo cmalu se sedgai be lo xunre = that which is small and wears a hood, and is red?
08:11 < Ilmen> se sedgai be lo xunre = to be hooded with something red (with a red hood)
08:11 <@xalbo> {la cmalu se ke xunre sedgai} seems good, yeah. Small, (red hood)ed.
08:12  * xalbo wonders whether mapku includes hoods. Probably not.
08:13 < Ilmen> xajmi: "ke" is a tanru-grouping operator; I think you probably haven't learn about it yet
08:13 < gleki> http://tiki.lojban.org/tiki/la+cmalu+je+xunre+mapku
08:14 < Ilmen> cmalu zdani gerku = (cmalu zdani) gerku = dog of small home
08:14 < Ilmen> er
08:14  * la_kristan finishes reading selpa'i's proposal.
08:14 < Ilmen> "small dog of home"
08:14 < Ilmen> cmalu ke zdani gerku = cmalu (zdani gerku) = small (home dog)
08:14 < xajmi> aparently not... sorry
08:15 < Ilmen> so adding "ke" changes what "cmalu" applies to, in this case
08:15 < xajmi> wow thanks gleki
08:16 < Ilmen> cmalu nixli ckule = (cmalu nixli) ckule = [small girl] school
08:16 < xajmi> ui... got it thanks Ilmen
08:16 < Ilmen> cmalu ke nixli ckule = small [girl school]
08:16 < Ilmen> so here it's the school that's small
08:16 < gleki> just reformatted in the new wiki: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/la_cmalu_je_xunre_mapku
08:16 < la_kristan> well, this connective proposal is interesting, but...
08:17 < la_kristan> it kinda messes things up for backward compatability, ĉu ne?
08:18 < gleki> no
08:18 < durka42> actually, it's backwards compatible
08:18 < Ilmen> lol, what are those ".:" before the {i}?
08:18 < gleki> it doesnt break any existing usage
08:18 < durka42> though once you have such a simple and wonderful connective system, the temptation is high to repurpose the old connective words :)
08:18 < gleki> i dont know wy those ":" are there. In Tiki those are used for centering text although maybe it's just stylistic
08:18 < la_kristan> well, it's confusing to me...
08:19 < gleki> centering didnt work anyway
08:19 < gleki> the new connective system doesnt break the old one
08:19 < gleki> exp: mi klama je cu citka i do klama gi'e citka
08:19 < mensi> ([mi {CU <klama VAU>} {je <cu (¹citka VAU¹)> VAU}] [i {do <CU (¹klama VAU¹)> <gi'e (¹CU [citka VAU]¹) VAU>}])
08:19 < Ilmen> {gaJA} and {guJA} do break past usage. {JAcu} doesn't, except some very rare and tricky sentences involving {lu}, maybe
08:20 < Ilmen> er
08:20 < durka42> they do?
08:20 < durka42> GA JA was never allowed, was it?
08:20 < xajmi> well I apreciate your help guys... I hope we can talk some other time... have fun!!!
08:20 < xajmi> co'o
08:20 < durka42> co'o di'ai
08:20 < Ilmen> maybe they don't, durka42. I guess I'm too hot to think properly
08:21 < durka42> .u'i ko na xenru .i mi ka'e na'e drani
08:21 < jsgrant> .i coi la terdi
08:21 < durka42> coi grant
08:21 < Ilmen> coi
08:21 < Ilmen> co'o la xajmi
08:21 < la_kristan> all I know is, that learning a language that is still subject to so much tinkering wasn't exactly what I was looking for...
08:21 < jsgrant> Are there any non-one off comics for/in Lojban? Seems like a fun project to do while learning in-tangent.
08:22 < jsgrant> la_kristan: What, regarding Lojban?
08:22 < la_kristan> where I come from, tinkerers aren't taken seriously.
08:22 < la_kristan> jsgrant: yeah.
08:22 < durka42> where you come from = esperanto?
08:22 < gleki> la_kristan: the use the normal system
08:23 < jsgrant> la_kristan: You could always go for Loglan, or something; I don't think that's been touched for sometime as far as I'm aware.
08:23 < la_kristan> durka42: exactly
08:23 < gleki> neither Lojban was touched.
08:23 < durka42> well, lojban is much younger than esperanto
08:24 < Ilmen> la_kristan: {jeCU} is backward compatible, and the experimental parser both GIhA and JACU coexist without any problem.
08:24 < durka42> the point stands, though
08:24 < Ilmen> Anyway nothing force you to use JACU, you can always use the standard GIhA
08:24 < jsgrant> Generally, Lojban having a notable number of individuals in the community wherein they are more willing/likely experiment with some of the primitive to complex structures in the lang, is a big selling point to me.
08:24 < gleki> {jecu} is an addition to the language. it doesnt change the existing language
08:24 < gleki> tinkering is usually when you break existing things like with cekitaujau
08:25 < durka42> that's disingenuous to say. if it catches on, you'll hear it in the speech of others
08:25 < durka42> backwards compatibility doesn't mean we aren't tinkering :)
08:25 < durka42> I don't think there's as much tinkering going on as it seems, but I don't want to misrepresent it
08:25 < durka42> jsgrant: :)
08:26 < la_kristan> but the coexistence of both merely necessitates the learning of both systems.
08:26 < gleki> lojban develops and new words are accumulated
08:26 < gleki> and new constructs
08:28 < la_kristan> like iĉismo would make things simpler, if it has been there from the beginning, but at this point it only confuses people and increases the learning load.
08:29 < la_kristan> because it's one of the few reform proposals that's gained enough traction to be a problem.
08:29  * Ilmen ja uzas i^cismon
08:30 < la_kristan> then Ilmen is part of the problem.
08:30 < gleki> in the Crash Course i only mentioned that {je} is allowed instead of {e} but i dont mention {je cu}
08:30 < gleki> i hope this doesnt increase any learning load since {je} already exists
08:30 < Ilmen> Nu, simple imagu, ke "i^c" estas simpla vortoradiko, kaj ne sufikso. ^Gi ne estus kontraufundamenta, ^cu ja?
08:31 < gleki> i can only see that "sxli" is used normally.
08:31  * la_kristan may be disconnected at any time...
08:31 < gleki> viricxo, virino, patricxo, patrino. okej. kio estas "patro" nun? :D
08:32 < la_kristan> jen la problemo.
08:32 < Ilmen> Mi tamen ne uzas "patri^co", tial, ke "patro" estas bedaurinde baze i^ca vorto
08:33 < la_kristan> homoj kiuj uzas na "iĉ" estas kontraŭfundamentaj!
08:33 < la_kristan> zo'o
08:34 < Ilmen> Eble io kiel "gepatrero" povus funkcii, kvankam ^gi estas malbela
08:34 < la_kristan> !
08:35 < la_kristan> mi vidas iufoje "gepatro"
08:35 < la_kristan> tio ne estas /tro/ fia, sed...
08:37 < Ilmen> Well, I think I'll take my leave now, instead of talking off-topic with ugly diacritic-less Esperanto :P
08:37 < Ilmen> co'o
08:37 < la_kristan> lol
08:38 < la_kristan> co'o
08:38 < jsgrant> Ilmen: co'o
08:38 < durka42> co'o di'ai
08:39 < la_kristan> tiuj, kiuj ne uzas ĉapelajn literojn nek h-sistemon...
08:40 < la_kristan> estas KONTRAŬFUNDAMENTAJ!!!
08:42 < la_kristan> .i ta'onai na pluka mi fa lenu lo prenu cu cizra pilno lo cmavo
08:42 < gleki> je'e je'e
08:42 < gleki> i nabmi
08:42 < gleki> i ku'i la lojban ca'o zasti iju lo prenu cu troci lo ka cnegau ly
08:43  * gleki tiuj, kiuj uzas x-sistemon estas ... kontrauXfundamentalistoj :D
08:44 < la_kristan> fiacxe!
08:45 < gleki> "Zamenhofo" sutysisku needs fixes for being able to search both in standard, x- and h- systems
08:47 < la_kristan> hm, not familiar with that...
08:47 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/zamenhofo/index.html#sisku/Lojban
08:48 < gleki> i used some dictionary that uses x-system but probably standard system as well
08:48 < gleki> a mess
08:48 < la_kristan> but what I'm saying is, if some people use that taujau whatever-it-is, and others don't, then we've got a split!
08:49 < gleki> taujau is a problem because {mi broda lo du brode} can mean two different things in the two dialects
08:50 < la_kristan> yeah.
08:51 < la_kristan> btw what does "ni" mean in this system?
08:51 < gleki> i guess it doesnt change
08:51 < la_kristan> I'm still trying to decipher rap lyrics...
08:51 < gleki> i guess you need to just mass replace all words ki=>ke'a, ce=> ce'u
08:52 < la_kristan> du -> du'u
08:52 < gleki> se'e => zu'ai
08:52 < gleki> si'u=> si'au
08:53 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ce_ki_tau_jau
08:53 < gleki> i dont know which of that was used
08:55 < la_kristan> oh, su'o -> su!
08:55 < la_kristan> I thought maybe he just wanted to erase his song!
08:57  * nuzba @uitki: la cmalu je xunre mapku - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/la_cmalu_je_xunre_mapku by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1To1mzo]
09:07  * nuzba @uitki: Learning materials. Secondary links - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Learning_materials._Secondary_links by Gleki - /* Talking to Lojbanists. Live support */ [http://bit.ly/1NW9h3W]
09:08 < la_kristan> But, of course people are attracted to shorter words...
09:09 < la_kristan> so this could attract a following.
09:09 < durka42> that's why I go back and forth in my feelings about CKTJ
09:09 < la_kristan> and once you've got the big shot musician using it...
09:10 < la_kristan> then we need to know it, to understand him.
09:10 < la_kristan> and then what?
09:10 < durka42> the album certainly made more people aware of JACU and CKTJ
09:11 < la_kristan> it's a subversive diabolical plot!
09:11 < gleki> jacu saves no syllables most of the time
09:11 < durka42> not everything is about syllables
09:11 < la_kristan> fdk
09:11 < la_kristan> uh, i mean
09:11 < la_kristan> afk
09:12 < la_kristan> if you need me, highlight me.
09:15 < gleki> je'e je'e i ai mi pilno lo bombila
09:15 < ctefaho> what exactly is the "'" called in lojban?
09:15 < gleki> en: y'y
09:15 < mensi> y'y = [BY2] letteral for '. |>>> officialdata
09:15 < ctefaho> I did not ask for the letteral
09:16 < ctefaho> is there a lujvo/tanru/whatever for it?
09:16 < gleki> y'y is a pro-sumti
09:16 < gleki> i.e. it works as a noun or pronoun
09:16 < ctefaho> I know
09:16 < gleki> you may say {zo y'y}
09:17 < durka42> not sure if there is a selbri defined for it
09:17 < durka42> like "." is denpa bu, "," is slaka bu...
09:17 < ctefaho> yeah durka42 that was what I wondered
09:17 < gleki> then i need a selbri for z"
09:18 < ctefaho> you are very helpful now gleki
09:18 < durka42> karsnaseibu'i
09:19 < ctefaho> actually nvm;o
09:26 < la_kristan> vasxu bu, maybe?
09:31 < cliva> spagetufa: +cktj lo remna cuvoilonuzoko ze'u zmadu zodolokamakaunilonu cusku cekicu cafne ka'ese jalge lonuki fengu
09:31 < spagetufa> ([FA {lo remna KU}] [cu {<voi (¹[FA {lo <nu (²[FA {zo ko}] [CU {<ze'u zmadu> <(³[FE {zo do}] [FI {lo <ka (⁴[FA {ma kau}] [CU {<ni (⁵[FA {lo <nu (⁶CU [cusku {<(⁷FE ce⁷) (⁷FI ki⁷)> VAU}]⁶) KEI> KU}] [cu {cafne VAU}]⁵) KEI> VAU}]⁴) KEI> KU}]³) VAU>}]²) KEI> KU}] [CU {<ka'e (²se jalge²)> <(²FE [lo {nu <(³FA ki³) (³CU [fengu VAU]³)> KEI} KU]²) VAU>}]¹) KEI> VAU}])
09:31 < cliva> la_kristan: ^ cekitaujau parser, might be useful
09:32 < la_kristan> cliva: it could be, if I could make any sense of it...
09:34 < la_kristan> perhaps a simpler example might be in order?
09:34 < cliva> je'u lo te pruce be lo barda jufra ka'e simlu lo ka kalsa
09:35 < cliva> spagetufa: +cktj lo nu su da kakne tau lo .itku'ile na lakne
09:35 < spagetufa> ([FA {lo <nu (¹[FA {<su BOI> da}] [CU {kakne <(²FE [tau {lo itku'ile KU} LU'U]²) VAU>}]¹) KEI> KU}] [CU {<na lakne> VAU}])
09:38 < la_kristan> vlaste: lakne
09:38 < vlaste> lakne = x1 (event/state/property) is probable/likely under conditions x2.
09:38 < la_kristan> vlaste: itku'ile
09:38 < vlaste> itku'ile = x1 pertains to Ithkuil/Illaksh language in aspect x2
09:40 < la_kristan> that anyone can do anything with Ithkuil is not likely?
09:40 < la_kristan> true enough, I guess.
09:42 < la_kristan> but anyhow, this seems to be a major overhaul of the cmavo.
09:42 < la_kristan> and not compatible with the standard usage.
09:43 < la_kristan> and not really necessary...
09:44 < la_kristan> I'm not really very concerned with reducing syllables.
09:44 < ldlework> what is a major overhaul?
09:44 < ldlework> oh
09:45 < la_kristan> In Esperantujo one becomes accustomed to the multiplicity of syllables.
09:45 < cliva> around 15-20 out of all 500 or so cmavo are affected, but the changes are highly visible, je'u
09:46 < la_kristan> In English, I'd say my friend is a lefty; in E-o she's a "maldekstramanulino".
09:46 < la_kristan> no shortage of syllables there.
09:48 < la_kristan> is there a difference between "gi je" and "je cu"?
09:48 < cliva> same meaning (though with je cu you have two places to attach attitudinals)
09:49 < la_kristan> and what do the two "gi"s mean in this line?
09:50 < la_kristan> .i ca gi do mrobi'o gi mi jmive za'o
09:50 < cliva> "ca gi" also works as a gek: "while you're dying, I'm still alive"
09:51 < la_kristan> ah
09:52 < la_kristan> in both connective systems, or just this newer one?
09:53 < cliva> both of them
09:53 < la_kristan> okay.
09:53 < jdjdjdjsjyjyj> coi la cliva
09:53 < cliva> coi la .u'enmo
09:53 < Amnadya> ihe
09:55 < Amnadya> kaheku ku lu jai riha manci lihu ja lu nunmanci kihu
09:55 < Amnadya> si lihu
09:56 < Amnadya> i pehi loremoi
09:56 < Amnadya> i ambigu kuhi
09:56 < cliva> je'e .i lo .itku'ile ga'a mi za'o .itku'ile
09:56 < cliva> y
09:57 < cliva> je'e .i lo .itku'ile ga'a mi za'o ba'e *zi'e* .itku'ile
09:58 < Amnadya> sahe ka nunmanci dahi
09:58 < Amnadya> saheruhe
09:58 < la_kristan> hĥhĥh
09:59 < Amnadya> i astrato
10:00 < Amnadya> ithkuil: nadya
10:00 < ithkuil> nadya: P1S1/STA-n-OBL-UNI/CSL/A/PRX/RPV-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
10:00 < Amnadya> ie
10:01 < Amnadya> dahi zei ka zei sucti
10:01 < Amnadya> A = ka/siho
10:02 < Amnadya> RPV = dahi
10:02 < Amnadya> saheruhe
10:02 < cliva> da'i xamgu fa lo nu ka'e ku lo ditfaulte rafsi cmene na pagbu lo gloso
10:03 < Amnadya> ie i tcaci mi
10:04 < la_kristan> don't you agree that having two mutually incompatible cmavo systems competing for usage in a language whose userbase is already rather small could be a problem?
10:04 < gleki> i do
10:05 < gleki> shanoxilt seems to be of the same opinion
10:05 < gleki> but that's all a long story
10:46 < Amnadya> ithkuil: hata'bawëla'n
10:46 < ithkuil> hata’bawëla’n: CNF-P1S1/STA-CTX/PPS/ASR-a’-b-OBL-ASR/FAC-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-ASU-IFL/UNFRAMED
10:46 < Amnadya> ro lo ditfaulte
10:46 < Amnadya> ikuhi lo romoi na cohe
10:48 < Amnadya> ithkuil: hata'bawëla
10:48 < ithkuil> hata’bawëla: CNF-P1S1/STA-CTX/PPS/ASR-a’-b-OBL-ASR/FAC-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
10:48 < Amnadya> ca drani
11:08 < Amnadya> oiho mi se fanza lo correlative case i mi na jimpe fi lo jai tai pilno
11:10  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: http://vodka-pomme.net/projects/tengwar-for-lojban/lojteng    調べてみると結構開発してるひといるっぽい [http://bit.ly/1J6wjkc]
11:12  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: 色んな人がデザインしてるんだけど、テングワール素人だから、どれがイイ感じなのかがわからんのよね…。ほら、なんか、ひらがなをロジバンで使えるようにデザインされて、「ち」をティの音に充てられたりすると嫌やん？そんな感じよ    http://mw.lojban.org/papri/tengwar [http://bit.ly/1J6wV9w]
11:14  * nuzba @Kohelang: テングワールには色々なモードや流派があるのでarihatoさんがどの書き方を選んだのかは不明ですが、音価:西方語／読み順:クウェンヤで lojban lo logji bangu と一応読めます。これでロジバン的に意味は通りますか？ [http://bit.ly/1RmAZfC]
11:16  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: ロジバン ～論理的な言語～　っていうロジバンwikiのサブタイみたいなやつやな [http://bit.ly/1J6xkJb]
11:49 < gleki> Amnadya: la'oi correlative zo'u zo fancu pei
11:49 < Amnadya> y
11:50 < ldlework> The name Penny results in an unfortunate lojbanization.
11:50 < Amnadya> i sahu mi tesimlu loka malgi sai
11:50 < gleki> i ku'i zoi gy
11:50 < gleki> As will be described in Section 5.4.2.3, the CORRELATIVE is used with verbal case-frames to convey the equivalent of simple relative clauses in Western languages.
11:50 < gleki> gy
11:50 < gleki> ge'e
11:50 < gleki> i na djuno i mabla sidbo vau pe'i
11:50 < Amnadya> cizra mi
11:51 < gleki> i simsa zo pe i simsa zo fancu i simsa zo poi
11:51 < gleki> The CORRELATIVE case (discussed in Section 4.5.25) is used to create case-frames which are semantically equivalent to the English phrase ‘that/which/who is/are…’ Such a case-frame would be used in conjunction with specific Functions (see Section 5.1) to convey whether the relationship of the relativized clause to the main clause is one of description, copula identification, etc.
11:52 < gleki>  i lo rusko jbopre soi sisi itkuiile'ypre pu finti la'e di'e
11:53 < gleki> lo xamsi poi blanu => framed+correlative
11:54 < ldlework> Is there any other consonant I can use to terminate "peni" (lojbanization of Penny)
11:54 < ldlework> other than "s" I mean
11:54 < gleki> <translate who="gleki">thus we have three stages of getting a "~=property": 1. the light one using correlative 2. the heavy one using decriptive function 2. the total one using framed relation + correlative
11:55 < gleki> the sea is blue = stative/ descriptive
11:55 < gleki> the sea that is blue = framed/ correlative
11:56 < gleki> and no way to say "blue sea"</translate>
11:56 < ldlework> blanu xamsi
11:56 < ldlework> the english is a tanru also
11:56 < ldlework> so nothing of value is lost
11:57 < gleki> oh oh
11:58 < durka42> ldlework: yes. any other consonant. :p
11:58 < ldlework> even z?
11:58 < durka42> sure
11:58 < ldlework> neat
11:59 < gleki> one more quote: as far as i understand Correlative sets relation between formatives which is identical between oblique-content and oblique-verb. art-obl sex-obl - sex shows itself in art (sex is art-izing itself)
11:59 < ldlework> now I can referr to my cat iwthout feeling shame
11:59 < ldlework> ki'e
12:02 < noncomcinse> gleki: .i xu la sutysisku pu kakne loka djuno fi lo veljvo
12:05 < gleki> noncomcinse: xu ca na kakne
12:05 < Amnadya> jehe la gleki
12:05 < noncomcinse> gleki: go'i
12:06 < Amnadya> i rahu sohi ja sohe lo mupli jufra cu cizra mi su da
12:06 < Amnadya> au mi jimpe
12:06 < gleki> ldlework: the newest rule is that words are lojbanized to the gismu nearest in pronunciation. Thus Penni becomes {pinji}. Feel free to use </zoho>
12:07 < noncomcinse> .i zoi .urli. http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/#sisku/nerkla .urli zo'u jungau mi noda
12:07 < ldlework> gleki: u'i
12:07 < ldlework> Why are people using h?
12:07 < gleki> this time because ' can't be a part of html tags
12:09 < Amnadya> because itd easier on this phone
12:10 < gleki> noncomcinse: cinri i na nabmi mi http://snag.gy/sDoox.jpg
12:12 < noncomcinse> gleki: mi pilno lo la plise ku fonxa
12:13 < noncomcinse> .i ku'i zoi .urli. http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/#sisku/ta'anai mu'a .urli cu tolspofu
12:14 < noncomcinse> s/ta'anai/ta'a%20nai/
12:14 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: .i ku'i zoi .urli. http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/#sisku/ta'a%20nai mu'a .urli cu tolspofu
12:18 < noncomcinse> .i zo .rai,en. zo'u xu nitcu tu'a me'o slaka bu
12:27 < durka42> zo raien du zo ra,ien
12:27 < zahlman> zo rai'yn pei
12:28 < durka42> ne'au
12:28 < noncomcinse> xu me'o .ybu zo'u cmevla curmi
12:29 < durka42> go'i
12:29 < noncomcinse> ua
12:29 < noncomcinse> .i mi ckule finti bau la .lojban.
12:29 < zahlman> i'e
12:33 < zahlman> mi puzi co'e la lajda'arxivos lo mi me'oi cidysys .i zdile .i ku'i gasnu co cortu lo mi degji oi
12:33 < noncomcinse> .i finti bau lo glico ji'a
12:33 < noncomcinse> .i .ei cliva co'o .irci
12:33 < zahlman> oiru'e co'o
12:34 < noncomcinse> .oi ja'ai ji'a
12:34 < noncomcinse> co'o
12:53 < Amnadya> ithkuil: penis
12:53 < ithkuil> penis: P1S1/STA-p-ABS-UNI/COA/M/DEL/NRM-PLA_1/1-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
12:53 < Amnadya> oi
12:54 < durka42> are all of these actually valid or is it just GIGO
12:54 < durka42> does ithkuil have any phonotactics, .u'i
12:54 < Amnadya> they are real possible words
12:54 < ctefaho> camxes: penis
12:54 < camxes> penis
12:54 < Amnadya> see the gloss
12:54 < ctefaho> ++
12:56 < Amnadya> ithkuil: camxes
12:56 < ithkuil> camxes: P1S1/STA-c-OBL-CPN/ASO/N/DEL/NRM-PLA_1/3-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
12:56 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "P" found.
12:58 < durka42> .u'i
12:58 < durka42> I don't see any gloss..
12:58 < durka42> ithkuil: vlaste
12:58 < ithkuil> vlaste: P1S1/STA-vl-OBL-COH/ASO/M/DEL/NRM-RPS-IFL/UNFRAMED
12:58 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/P1S1%2FSTA-vl-OBL-COH%2FASO%2FM%2FDEL%2FNRM-RPS-IFL%2FUNFRAMED
12:59 < Amnadya> the output
12:59 < Amnadya> is what it means
12:59 < durka42> ithkuil: vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
12:59 < ithkuil> error
12:59 < durka42> so there are phonotactics, but they are quite loose :)
12:59 < durka42> possibly a strict superset of lojban
12:59 < durka42> ithkuil: mitavladofolologjibangu
12:59 < ithkuil> error
13:00 < Amnadya> thats not how ithkuil works
13:00 < ctefaho> ithkuil: bananas
13:00 < ithkuil> bananas: P1S1/STA-b-OBL-UNI/COA/M/DEL/NRM-AGC_1/5-PLA_1/5-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
13:00 < ctefaho> ^means what?
13:01 < durka42> just what it says
13:01 < durka42> li'a
13:01 < Amnadya> look up all the abbreviations
13:02 < Amnadya> b + a + n + an + as
13:02 < Amnadya> 5 rafsi
13:03 < ctefaho> ugh
13:03 < ctefaho> are they all cases?
13:04 < ctefaho> all I know about Ithkuil is the semantics behind their cases not how words work
13:04 < ctefaho> I assume that's a verb?
13:05 < Amnadya> can be verb or noun
13:05 < Amnadya> the second a is the case
13:05 < Amnadya> first*
13:06 < Amnadya> a word can only have one case
13:06 < Amnadya> the different rafsi occupy different slots
13:08 < ctefaho> but ok a case only goes into 1 word
13:08 < ctefaho> a/1
13:08 < Amnadya> hm?
13:09 < ctefaho> I had skipped the morphology part completely
13:09 < Amnadya> ithkuil is 97% morphology
13:10 < ctefaho> that's why I am not into it;)
13:10 < Amnadya> almost zero syntax
13:10 < ctefaho> well that's one way to do I guess
13:13 < ctefaho> besides jbobau I am more interested in Taoq Dzu now tbh
13:13 < ctefaho> sleek and lean
13:13 < ctefaho> compared to bulky jbobau
13:13 < ctefaho> I do like my jbobau bulky though
13:13 < Amnadya> Toaq Dzu huh
13:14 < ctefaho> ...Toaq Dzu
13:14 < ctefaho> but ok done with some stuff, can focus on bananas now
13:15 < Amnadya> b is the root
13:15 < ctefaho> "P1S1" means what?
13:15 < Amnadya> everything else is derivation
13:15 < Amnadya> pattern 1 stem 1
13:16 < ctefaho> man you weren't kidding when you said this language was all about morphology
13:20 < ctefaho> ...I just don't know what I am to look for
13:20 < Amnadya> its overwhelming
13:20 < ctefaho> je'u
13:21 < Amnadya> but it gets better
13:21 < ctefaho> b is a "formative"?
13:22 < Amnadya> no
13:22 < Amnadya> b is the root
13:22 < Amnadya> the whole word is the formative
13:23 < ctefaho> jimpe
13:24 < ctefaho> ITM
13:24 < ctefaho> Intermittent
13:24 < ctefaho> b
13:24 < ctefaho> is that it?
13:24 < Amnadya> no
13:25 < Amnadya> b means desire. its in the lexicon
13:26 < ctefaho> right
13:26 < ctefaho> I just don't know where to look, the morphology is...overwhelming
13:27 < ctefaho> sigh looks like I have to read everything from the beginning
13:27 < Amnadya> you need to learn to recognize which slot a rafsi is uccupying
13:27 < Amnadya> occupying
13:30 < ctefaho> well the introduction wasn't very helpful
13:31 < ctefaho> ok found what I need
13:32 < Amnadya> it took me several reads through the book until i started to understand something
13:32 < Amnadya> be patient
13:32 < ctefaho> you could at least point me to where to start
13:33 < Amnadya> everywhere
13:33 < Amnadya> what are you looking for
13:34 < Amnadya> the website doesnt have any easy intro. its only a grammar reference
13:38 < ctefaho> well I need to know what I am looking for to find it
13:38 < Amnadya> the gloss tells you
13:39 < Amnadya> cryptically
13:39 < Amnadya> and experience
13:39 < ctefaho> ...but i have no idea what the gloss means
13:39 < Amnadya> the website tells you
13:39 < ctefaho> ...
13:39 < Amnadya> each 3letter code
13:40 < Amnadya> is a
13:40 < Amnadya> affix value
13:40 < ctefaho> where do I find the corresponding chart?
13:40 < ctefaho> or charts
13:41 < zipcpi> vlaste: torso (gimka)
13:41 < vlaste> zo torso gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo torso gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
13:41 < zipcpi> xu gimy'inda
13:41 < ctefaho> I am trying to understand the word structure but my god what a beast
13:41 < Amnadya> http://www.ithkuil.net/abbreviations.html
13:41 < zipcpi> mi pu pensi tu'a zo insa pe la tokpona ge'u ji'a
13:42 < ctefaho> ua ki'e la'oi .Amnadya.
13:42 < Amnadya> nahi gimyhinda i zo gimyhinda valsi lo se oinmo
13:43 < zipcpi> u'i
13:43 < Amnadya> lo gismu na vajmau lo drata brivla
13:43 < ctefaho> za'a do na nelci .y'y.
13:43 < mensi> i mi i mi i mi mo i mi na nelci
13:44 < Amnadya> lo fonxa na nelci
13:44 < mensi> ji'a mi mutce nelci i ie
13:44 < ctefaho> je'e
13:44 < ctefaho> some part of me still instantly thinks "fonxa" means fox
13:45 < Amnadya> ithkuil: fonxa
13:45 < ithkuil> fonxa: P1S1/STA-f-ERG-nx-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
13:45 < ctefaho> so P1S1 in that chart is?
13:45 < ctefaho> ...
13:45 < ctefaho> P1S1 doesn't seem to be in the chart nor P or S
13:46 < Amnadya> they are the vowel before the root
13:46 < Amnadya> part of the root meaning
13:46 < ctefaho> ithkuil: bananas
13:46 < ithkuil> bananas: P1S1/STA-b-OBL-UNI/COA/M/DEL/NRM-AGC_1/5-PLA_1/5-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
13:46 < ctefaho> root as in "Cr"?
13:46 < Amnadya> bananas = abananas
13:47 < Amnadya> yes
13:47 < ctefaho> = ?
13:47 < ctefaho> it is elliptical?
13:47 < Amnadya> the a can be omitted
13:47 < ctefaho> right
13:47 < Amnadya> also
13:48 < Amnadya> look at the gloss again. there are dashes and slashes
13:48 < Amnadya> dashes separate different rafsi
13:48 < ctefaho> dashes separate the word components I presume?
13:48 < Amnadya> slashes are different categories
13:48 < ctefaho> ..yeah
13:49 < ctefaho> yeah so far I am with you
13:49 < Amnadya> some rafsi contain information about multiple categories
13:49 < ctefaho> and the same sound can be in different categories too
13:49 < ctefaho> (s)
13:49 < Amnadya> sure
13:50 < Amnadya> Cr means root Consonant
13:50 < ctefaho> but ok whatever the first a does is P1S1?
13:50 < Amnadya> C is always consonant
13:51 < zipcpi> rafsi: tos
13:51 < mensi> y no da se tolcri
13:51 < zipcpi> rafsi: zma
13:51 < mensi> zo zmadu se rafsi zo'oi zma
13:51 < zipcpi> tosymabru
13:51 < Amnadya> the a before the b
13:51 < Amnadya> is the stem and function
13:51 < Amnadya> its invisible because it was elided
13:52 < Amnadya> defaults are usually elided
13:52 < zipcpi> va'o da'i lo nu ra'oi .tos. rafsi zo torso kei zo tosymabru co'a uo se smuni
13:52 < ctefaho> ...is "a" part of the I Cv?
13:52 < ctefaho> is there a consonant elided before it too?
13:53 < Amnadya> a lot has been elided but you dont have to care
13:53 < ctefaho> je'e
13:54 < Amnadya> Vr is it yes
13:54 < zipcpi> ku'i tau zoi zoi torso mammal zoi .y.
13:54 < Amnadya> cant be Cv because its a vowel
13:54 < zipcpi> lo mabru poi se torso go u'i
13:55 < ctefaho> Pattern 1 Stem 1 (a)
13:55 < ctefaho> gotcha
13:55 < Amnadya> yes
13:56 < ctefaho> b is Cr then?
13:56 < Amnadya> yes
13:58 < ctefaho> and (a) is simply "stative manifestation"?
13:58 < ctefaho> or do the 3 stem things mess around with that
13:58 < Amnadya> which a
13:58 < zipcpi> roda je noda gimy'inda
13:59 < Amnadya> the a marks three things. stem 1 pattern 1 and stative function
14:00 < ctefaho> yeah the first elided a in bananas
14:00 < Amnadya> yes
14:01 < ctefaho> and the Cr-b simply means "want/desire/request"
14:01 < ctefaho> ?
14:02 < Amnadya> yes. and the preceding a makes it more specific
14:02 < ctefaho> so, stative manifestation of desire
14:03 < ctefaho> ...whatever that means
14:03 < Amnadya> state of desire
14:03 < ctefaho> je'e
14:03 < ctefaho> just looked up the word "stative"
14:03 < ctefaho> kinda sorta helped
14:03 < ctefaho> camxes: kinda sorta
14:03 < camxes> ([kinda sorta] VAU)
14:03 < ctefaho> ++
14:03 < ctefaho> better gismu have never been coined
14:04 < ctefaho> next a is Vc then I believe
14:05 < Amnadya> yes. case
14:05 < Amnadya> oblique case
14:05 < ctefaho> content
14:05 < ctefaho> that one I at least know what it means
14:06 < zipcpi> mi uenmo ru'e lo nu zo mroxadni punai se jbovlaste
14:06 < Amnadya> the next affix is a Ca affix and combines five categories at once
14:07 < ctefaho> State of desire, that which is desired?
14:07 < ctefaho> the word is what is desired in some state of desire?
14:07 < ctefaho> hmm
14:07 < Amnadya> zahi djica
14:07 < ctefaho> but OBL?
14:08 < Amnadya> the participants are not specified. theyd be the nouns
14:08 < Amnadya> verbs take oblique case
14:09 < zipcpi> lo'e zazdumu lo'e nundumu frica ma
14:09 < zipcpi> .y.
14:09 < ctefaho> is this a verb then?
14:09 < Amnadya> unless they are in framed relation, in which case they take any noun case
14:09 < zipcpi> lo'e zazdumu lo'e nundumu cu frica ma
14:09 < Amnadya> tosmabru
14:09 < zipcpi> za zdumu
14:10 < ctefaho> well what does the Vc-a do to the word then?
14:10 < Amnadya> we cant be sure its a verb
14:10 < zipcpi> li'a zozdumu cnino gismu
14:10 < Amnadya> but lets just say yes
14:10 < ctefaho> when did it stop being a verb then?
14:10 < ctefaho> or when will it
14:10 < Amnadya> it didnt
14:10 < Amnadya> its just both
14:10 < Amnadya> dont worry bout it
14:10 < ctefaho> okay
14:11 < Amnadya> and oblique case does nothing with verbs
14:11 < Amnadya> just a place holder
14:11 < zipcpi> How does a state differ from an event?
14:11 < ctefaho> I see
14:11 < ctefaho> n is COA ?
14:12 < Amnadya> see above about Ca
14:12 < Amnadya> the n marks five categories
14:13 < Amnadya> separated by slashes
14:14 < Amnadya> configuration
14:14 < ctefaho> the "UNI/COA/M/DEL/NRM"?
14:14 < Amnadya> yes
14:14 < Amnadya> affiliation
14:14 < ctefaho> one letter marking 5 categories at once?
14:14 < Amnadya> etc
14:14 < Amnadya> yes
14:14 < Amnadya> the a also marked three
14:15 < ctefaho> ok found the tables
14:15 < ctefaho> are you a computer or something
14:15 < ctefaho> seriously how do you speak something like this
14:15 < Amnadya> the Ca affix has 1728 values
14:16 < ctefaho> and one is supposed to learn them?
14:16 < Amnadya> yes. but you could learn them naturalky
14:16 < Amnadya> through exposure
14:16 < ctefaho> no
14:17 < ctefaho> just no
14:17 < Amnadya> uhi
14:17 < ctefaho> that seems totally unfit for a human language
14:17 < Amnadya> wanna bet money on it?
14:17 < ctefaho> I rather learn a hundred more BAI than that
14:17 < PrincessBecca> what is this about, is this about places again
14:17 < Amnadya> BAI suck tho.
14:18 < Amnadya> most of them anyway
14:18 < ctefaho> agreed
14:18 < ctefaho> I cut a whole lot of them out in my dialect
14:18 < Amnadya> tenselike BAI are good
14:18 < ctefaho> and some other changes
14:18 < ctefaho> I am now sitting on 100 free non-experimential cmavo that I don't know what to do with
14:18 < zipcpi> PrincessBecca: It's about Ithkuil
14:18 < PrincessBecca> oh
14:18 < ctefaho> oh well usage will probably be found
14:19 < ctefaho> as for Ithkuil
14:20 < Amnadya> zoho we are only at the n so far
14:20 < ctefaho> Uniplex configuration, Coalescent affiliation, Monadic perspective, Delimitive extension, Normal essence
14:20 < Amnadya> correct
14:20 < ctefaho> ...is it possible to explain that in a short and simple way?
14:20 < Amnadya> not for me on a phone
14:21 < ctefaho> but it means some crazy massive semantic stuff
14:21 < ctefaho> gotcha
14:22 < ctefaho> next a is "Suffix:  Degree of Agency"
14:22 < Amnadya> yes
14:22 < ctefaho> plus 1
14:22 < Amnadya> the a marks the fifth degree
14:22 < Amnadya> a-n
14:23 < Amnadya> the n is the suffix
14:23 < ctefaho> plus Existential context, Informal designation
14:23 < ctefaho> just more semantic specifiers then?
14:23 < Amnadya> the context is default so ignore it
14:24 < Amnadya> the gloss shouldnt show it
14:24 < ctefaho> cliva said he would fix it
14:24 < Amnadya> informal designation comes from the penultimate stress
14:25 < Amnadya> which tells you which stem to pick
14:25 < ctefaho> I get the idea that it puts a massive amount of semantics in simple words
14:26 < ctefaho> /in a small space
14:27 < zipcpi> exp: tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
14:27 < mensi> (tu'e [{CU <broda VAU>} {i <CU (¹brode VAU¹)>}] tu'u)
14:27 < ctefaho> so uniplex is some holistic state of desire?
14:27 < zipcpi> exp: (tu'e [{CU <broda VAU>} {i <CU (¹brode VAU¹)>}] tu'u) goi ko'a
14:27 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
14:28 < zipcpi> exp: tu'e broda .i brode tu'u goi ko'a
14:28 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
14:28 < zipcpi> exp: tu'e broda .i brode tu'u cu'e ko'a
14:28 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
14:28 < Amnadya> the formative makes little sense i think
14:28 < zipcpi> exp: tu'e cu'e ko'a broda .i brode tu'u
14:28 < mensi> (tu'e [{<cu'e ko'a> <CU (¹broda VAU¹)>} {i <CU (¹brode VAU¹)>}] tu'u)
14:28 < Amnadya> there is still another suffix
14:29 < Amnadya> -as
14:29 < ctefaho> I thought you said to ignore it?
14:29 < Amnadya> thats not it
14:29 < zipcpi> exp: cu'e ko'a tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
14:29 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "u" found.
14:29 < ctefaho> ah
14:30 < zipcpi> I've heard of proposals to expand the grammar of tu'e...tu'u but I'm not sure how
14:30 < Amnadya> PLA suffix
14:30 < Amnadya> fifth degree
14:30 < zipcpi> What I want to do is associate a tu'e...tu'u group to a sumti
14:30 < ctefaho> some setting
14:30 < ctefaho> and some 5th degree specifier?
14:30 < zipcpi> I made {goi'i} to associate a bridi to a sumti
14:31 < ctefaho> place/state
14:32 < Amnadya> place where one keeps or shelters
14:32 < ctefaho> I can't seem to find where PLA is defined
14:33 < Amnadya> suffixes
14:33 < ctefaho> suffixes?
14:33 < ctefaho> ah je'e
14:33 < ctefaho> "place where one keeps or shelters" right
14:35 < ctefaho> is all of "5-EXS-IFL" relevant?
14:35 < Amnadya> 5 is part of the suffix
14:35 < Amnadya> fifth degree
14:36 < ctefaho> what is EXS?
14:36 < ctefaho> can't find the def
14:36 < Amnadya> EXS is irrelevant here. existential context
14:36 < ctefaho> oh there
14:37 < Amnadya> its not even in the word
14:37 < Amnadya> the vowel is elided
14:37 < Amnadya> it would be bananasa
14:38 < ctefaho> so it is another word then
14:38 < Amnadya> which is the same
14:38 < ctefaho> ?
14:38 < Amnadya> but default elided
14:39 < Amnadya> existential context is default
14:39 < zipcpi> exp: tu'e cu'e ko'a broda .i brode tu'u coi ko'a
14:39 < mensi> (tu'e [{<cu'e ko'a> <CU (¹broda VAU¹)>} {i <CU (¹brode VAU¹)>}] tu'u [coi ko'a DOhU])
14:39 < ctefaho> asa is the same as "abanan"?
14:39 < Amnadya> eh?
14:39 < ctefaho> what is the same then?
14:40 < ctefaho> the elided first a?
14:40 < Amnadya> as what
14:40 < ctefaho> <Amnadya> which is the same
14:40 < ctefaho> ->?
14:40 < Amnadya> bananas = bananasa
14:40 < ctefaho> ah
14:40 < Amnadya> the final is is the context
14:40 < Amnadya> final a
14:40 < ctefaho> ahh
14:40 < ctefaho> now I get what you meant
14:40 < ctefaho> "its not even in the word"
14:41 < Amnadya> phew
14:41 < ctefaho> thought you meant sa falls off
14:41 < ctefaho> ...as
14:41 < Amnadya> i cant speak well on the phone sry
14:41 < ctefaho> nah I am just tired
14:41 < ctefaho> so sa
14:41 < ctefaho> sa is IFL?
14:41 < Amnadya> as-a
14:42 < Amnadya> no
14:42 < Amnadya> IFL is informal designation. it comes from the penultimare stress
14:42 < ctefaho> then I am lost
14:44 < ctefaho> if it is neither of AGC_1/5-PLA_1/5-EXS-IFL/
14:44 < ctefaho> or is the sa that 5?
14:44 < ctefaho> AS
14:45 < Amnadya> as i said the 5 is part of the suffix
14:45 < Amnadya> an is AGC_1/5
14:46 < Amnadya> as is pla1/5
14:46 < ctefaho> right
14:46 < Amnadya> fifth degree of the suffix
14:46 < Amnadya> type 1
14:46 < ctefaho> I just mixed things up again
14:47 < ctefaho> "one who does/is made to do"
14:48 < ctefaho> "place where one learns to"
14:48 < Amnadya> no
14:48 < Amnadya> five
14:48 < ctefaho> sa "place where one keeps or shelters"
14:48 < Amnadya> yes
14:49 < ctefaho> so "State of Desire" + "Uniplex configuration, Coalescent affiliation, Monadic perspective, Delimitive extension, Normal essence" + "one who does/is made to do" + "place where one keeps or shelters"
14:49 < Amnadya> so that is what bananas is
14:49 < ctefaho> plus content-case
14:49 < ctefaho> that's bananas man zo'o
14:50 < Amnadya> right on
14:50 < ctefaho> and I still have no idea what that is supposed to mean
14:51 < Amnadya> bit nonsensical
14:51 < ctefaho> does it mean anything to you?
14:51 < Amnadya> not really
14:51 < ctefaho> la'a
14:51 < ctefaho> English gloss would be?;)
14:52 < Amnadya> too painful
14:53 < zipcpi> mensi: doi durka42 I finally discovered why I accidentally add comments to the main thread for a word rather than the definition-specific thread. When you click "view comments for definition", then "post new", it posts to the main thread, not the definition-specific thread
14:53 < mensi> zipcpi: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.durka42.gy. di'a cusku da
14:53 < Amnadya> one who is made to desire but which is also a place where one keeps desire
14:53 < Amnadya> it is gibberish
14:54 < zipcpi> Deep
14:54  * zipcpi rings a zen gong
14:55 < ctefaho> je'e
14:55 < ctefaho> btw
14:55 < ctefaho> you do remind me of someone
14:56 < ctefaho> who also prefers this teaching style
14:56 < Amnadya> really
14:56 < ctefaho> selpai
14:56 < ctefaho> (pun on senpai that no one seems to get)
14:56 < durka42> ua
14:56 < mensi> durka42: cu'u la'o gy.zipcpi.gy.: I finally discovered why I accidentally add comments to the main thread for a word
14:56 < mensi> rather than the definition-specific thread. When you click "view comments for definition", then "post new", it posts to
14:56 < mensi> the main thread, not the definition-specific thread | 2015-07-09T21:53:23.152Z
14:56 < Amnadya> i was just about to mention it
14:56 < ctefaho> at least iirc from long time ago
14:57 <@xalbo> senpi pajni
14:57 < ctefaho> xalbo: exactly
14:57 < ctefaho> when I he teached me my first jbobau
14:58 < Amnadya> I'm sorta him. But on vacation.
14:58 < ctefaho> hasn't been around much lately unfortunately:|
14:58 < ctefaho> lol man you should play along;)
14:58 < Amnadya> i meant im trying to be like him
14:58 < ctefaho> now everyone will know
14:59 < zipcpi> xu la selpa'i cu selpre so'i da
14:59 < Amnadya> everyone already does know
14:59 < ctefaho> uh huh
14:59  * ctefaho blinks
14:59 < zipcpi> .y. se selpre
14:59 < zipcpi> xu la selpa'i cu se selpre so'i da
15:00 < ctefaho> I really am tired
15:00 < ctefaho> ...
15:00 < Amnadya> ithkuil melted you brain
15:00 < ctefaho> guess I read you too literal
15:00 < ctefaho> also brb
15:02 < Amnadya> How did you know who i was zoho
15:03 < ctefaho> instinct zo'o
15:03 < ctefaho> ...and my brain has been kinda melted the last 2 weeks
15:04 < ctefaho> language wise
15:05 < ctefaho> adding Ithkuil to the mix doesn't help;)
15:05 < Amnadya> you made a good effort today
15:05 < ctefaho> I do see its utility though
15:06 < ctefaho> cramming so much semantic potential into so little space
15:06 < ctefaho> quite the opposite of jbo's formal rafsi system...
15:09 < ctefaho> but the implementation, my god
15:09 <@xalbo> It's almost as though every Lojban predicate needed everything specified in full. {lu'omi'o ca'acaca'obu'uve'uze'avi'eta'enaicasnu}
15:09 < ctefaho> 45 consonants and 13 vowels
15:09 < ctefaho> at that point you can just go over and speak full IPA
15:09 < Amnadya> but that lojban phrase still contains a lot less nuance
15:09 < ctefaho> xalbo: .u'i
15:10 < Amnadya> german has more vowels
15:11 <@xalbo> True. The question is, is it possible in Ithkuil to express {mi'o casnu}, with its own nuance?
15:11 < ctefaho> swedish probably has more
15:11 < ctefaho> 9 or 18 depending how you count...
15:12  * ctefaho closes the Ithkuil book for now though
15:12 < ctefaho> also I just discovered http://www.lojban.org/files/etymology/langstat.99 today
15:12  * xalbo wonders how many consonants and vowels English hath.
15:12 < ctefaho> I don't think I have seen that referenced anywhere
15:13 < ctefaho> i.e. how the gismu scores came to be
15:13 < zipcpi> English has about 13 vowels
15:14 < zipcpi> Pronunciation-wise
15:14 < zipcpi> Not counting dipthongs
15:14 < zipcpi> diphthongs
15:14 < ctefaho> (found it when poking around in gimyzba)
15:16  * nuzba @s_i_d_a: carvi sance .i     lo karce zi pagre .i     ba smaji sicpi    #lojban #haiku [http://bit.ly/1KZiwjN]
15:18 < ctefaho> "Given that the Lojban gismu list is baselined, these numbers are primarily for academic interest." *evil laughter*
15:35 < zipcpi> ku'i pe'i ka'eku lei meti cmana fe'edei'a je fe'eco'u da
15:35 < zipcpi> .y.
15:36 < zipcpi> la'a na drani
16:20  * nuzba @uitki: Welcome!/en - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Welcome!/en by Wuzzy - Cleaned up list of dictionaries, added la vlasisku [http://bit.ly/1Csyjqb]
16:28 < ctefaho> co'o rodo
19:56  * nuzba @ligervision: @Fnxtx @evanmcm New thread: #lojban    #Singularity    When the Transhumanist succeeds in becoming God-like, his prison is complete.    I can prove. [http://bit.ly/1HgzTbg]
22:55 < gleki> well, {kinda} is {su'ova'e}
23:01 < gleki> alta: li mu cu mo
23:01 < mensi> ([FA {li <mu BOI> LOhO}] [cu {mo VAU}])
23:02 < gleki> alta: lo mlatu li pinxe
23:02 < mensi> ([FA {lo <mlatu NF> KU}] [li {pinxe NF} VAU])
23:33 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/cu_li
--- Day changed Fri Jul 10 2015
00:44 < gleki> Amnadya: mi mo'u jmina zo'ei lo sance http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/cilretci/    http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/cilretci/data.js
00:47 < gleki> en: online
00:47 < mensi> 3 da se tolcri: jbovlaste, jibgaucpe, xa'i
00:47 < gleki> u'i
00:47 < gleki> en: jibgaucpe
00:47 < mensi> jibgaucpe [< jibri gasnu cpedu ≈ Job do request] = x1 applies for job x2 to x3 in form x4. |>>> The x3 is likely the
00:47 < mensi> future employer. The x4 can be used to say "apply online" or "apply by mail". See also jibri, gasnu, cpedu. |>>>
00:47 < mensi> djeikyb
00:47 < gleki> en: xa'i
00:47 < mensi> xa'i = [UI3] discursive: imagining/roleplaying - not imagining/"out of character / in real life" |>>> Denotes imaginary/
00:47 < mensi> roleplaying actions and events. Serves much the same purpose as *star-quotes* or the /me function [= xa'i mi] would in
00:47 < mensi> online communities. Cf. da'i, xanri, xarpei |>>> spheniscine
01:09 < Amnadya> ua doi la gleki
01:10 < Amnadya> ihesai
01:11 < tsani> coi
01:11 < gleki> ei zo cilretci se basti zo'oi PooLearning
01:12 < Amnadya> uhi
01:12 < tsani> .i mi gleki lo nu viska lo so'i nintadni ne lo se .irci .i ca bo tcidu lo se .irci pruselsku
01:12 < gleki> ba'a do ba ze'usai tcidu
01:12 < tsani> .u'i .i mi lo pagbu ku po'o cu tcidu
01:13 < tsani> .i xu ma nuzba lo jbogu'e
01:13 < gleki> la cilretci zei'a mabla vau za'adai
01:14 < tsani> .i zo cilretci ki'a zo zei'a ki'a
01:14 < tsani> .i lo jbobau ku ki'a zo'o
01:14 < gleki> zo zei'a co'e lu fi'o zenba li'u
01:14 < tsani> ua
01:14 < gleki> jbo: zei'a
01:14 < mensi> zei'a = [TAhE] zo zei'a sumtcita gi'e cmavo ma'oi ta'e .i ca'e lo du'u «zei'a ko'a broda» cu du'u «zi'o zenba lo ni
01:14 < mensi> broda kei ko'a» kei gi'e va'i du'u «lo ni broda cu zilzena ko'a» |>>> srana fa zo zenba joi zo dei'a joi zo zilzena |>>>
01:14 < mensi> spheniscine
01:15 < gleki> en: zei'a
01:15 < mensi> zei'a = [TAhE] tense interval modifier: increasingly...; incrementative. Tagged sumti, if present, indicates amount of
01:15 < mensi> increase (lo te zenba) |>>> Alternate form to avoid confusion: ze'ai. See zenba. Opposite of dei'a |>>>
01:15 < mensi> spheniscine
01:15 < gleki> xm
01:15 < gleki> zo dei'a je'e
01:15 < gleki> i la sutysisku zo'u do djuno i na sanji lo drata nuzba
01:15 < gleki> i ua
01:16 < gleki> i mi pu zi finti la culis ku noi bankle
01:16 < gleki> alta: mi li monsuta
01:16 < mensi> ([FA mi] [li {monsuta NF} VAU])
01:16 < tsani> ua ie .i mi milxe co zgana lo nu do pu pilno
01:16 < tsani> .i na ku'i smujimpe
01:17 < gleki> zo li ka'e dunli zo cu
01:17 < gleki> i smudunli lu mi cu monsuta li'u
01:17 < tsani> .i xu djica lo nu lo jbobau lo tokpona cu binxo
01:17 < tsani> zo'o
01:17 < gleki> lo tokpisini
01:17 < tsani> ua
01:18 < gleki> i lo jbobau co'a bankle be lo tokpisini
01:19 < tsani> .i pe'i mi ca'o no'e smujimpe zo'e ne zo zei'a
01:19 < gleki> i xu do toktoki lo tokpisini i cu'ei ie mi likliki toktoki
01:19 < tsani> .i sa'e lu zi'o zenba li'u nonselsmu mi
01:20 < gleki> mi zenba lo ka certu la lojban i mi zei'a certu la lojban
01:20 < tsani> .i lo di'u nunpli ku .i'e nai
01:21 < tsani> .i lo nu lo sumtcita cu se vajni pe'a ru'e lo du'u makau sumti pamoi cu na'e racli
01:21 < tsani> .i ki'u ma lo nu pilno lo tanru ja lo lujvo cu banzu
01:21 < tsani> naku
01:22 < gleki> enfoka
01:23 < tsani> vlaste: enfoka
01:23 < vlaste> enfoka = x1 is in the focus of x2; x1 is the point where x2 focuses, converges
01:23 < gleki> i lu mi zei'a certu li'u zo'u zo certu enfoka
01:23 < gleki> i lu mi zenba lo ka certu li'u zo'u zo certu na enfoka
01:24 < gleki> i lu enfoka pe'a li'u la'a i ku'i na djuno lo du'u makau poi valsi cu mapti i zo xusra la'a
01:24 < tsani> .i ko jdice lo du'u makau enfoka vau sa'e
01:24 < gleki> i lu mi zei'a certu li'u zo'u zo certu enfoka
01:24 < tsani> .i ma jdice lo du'u zo certu na enfoka lu mi zenba lo ni certu li'u
01:24 < tsani> .u'i
01:25 < gleki> va'o ku zo certu cu nenri lo na'e ralju bridi i seni'i bo na enfoka
01:25 < tsani> .i va'i lo du'u makau enfoka cu na'e vajni mi
01:25 < tsani> .i da'i cusku lu .i mi certu zenba li'u
01:26 < gleki> lu i mi zenba  i fe bo certu la lojban li'u zo'u ro lo re selbri cu enfoka
01:26 < gleki> to ku'i zo ka canci i'enai toi
01:27 < gleki> i mutce clani tanru pilno nelci fa do ibo ja'o
01:27 < tsani> .i pe'i smudu'i fa lu mi ze'ai certu li'u lu mi zenba lo ni certu li'u .e lu mi certu zenba li'u
01:28 < tsani> *selsmudu'i
01:28 < gleki> lo tanru na satci
01:28 < gleki> ni'o ma nuzba API pe JVS doi samcre
01:29 < tsani> no da .u'i .i mi zukcfudu'e vau .oi
01:29 < gleki> oidai
01:30 < gleki> i ku'i mi bredi loka favgau la sutysisku si sutytiksku
01:32 < tsani> .i do pacna lo nu la sutysisku cu pilno API ne JVS ku xu
01:32 < gleki> go'i
01:33 < gleki> i ku'i co'a nunstika be JVS proga
01:34 < tsani> .i lo nu favgau JVS cu xagmau lo nu na favgau JVS .i ku'i xagrai fa lo nu gunka te zu'e lo nu la vlasisku ba za basti JVS
01:39 < gleki> mi nitcu fe po'o API
01:39 < gleki> i mi to'e certu tu'a la vlasisku
01:40 < gleki> i nu'oku la vlasisku zenba lo ni prane
01:40 < gleki> *cu
01:43 < gleki> i sa'e mi nitcu API pe lo JVS datni sorcu ju JVS
02:03  * nuzba @uitki: La Bangu: Lojban Dictionary with Examples - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/La_Bangu:_Lojban_Dictionary_with_Examples by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1MjTPNO]
02:11  * nuzba @uitki: L17-01 - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/L17-01 by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1JTub4Z]
03:57 < zipcpi> Hm I noticed that {gei} is a bit weird... exponent first, significand second, base last
03:58 < zipcpi> Guess they decided that order of magnitude was most important?
03:58 < gleki> en: gei
03:59 < gleki> selmaho:gei
03:59 < zipcpi> gei is VUhU
03:59 < mensi> gei = [VUhU2] trinary mathematical operator: order of magnitude/value/base; [b * (c to the a power)]. |>>>
03:59 < gleki> i know i just want to test mensi's links to cll
03:59 < mensi> officialdata
03:59 < mensi> .i lu gei li'u cmavo zo'oi VUhU2
03:59 < gleki> heh
04:00 < gleki> i'll fix sutysisku first
04:02 < gleki> fixed. will appear after the next update of the manifest file or you can just clear you appcache
04:02  * gleki wondering how many ofsuch fixes are needed
04:03 < gleki> we just need links to cll for every selmaho and every subselmaho http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/bangu.js
04:03 < Amnadya> la ctefaho ca certu la itkuhile
04:03 < gleki> je'upei
04:03 < Amnadya> nai zoho
04:03 < Amnadya> i kuhi lonu troci cu tolfaho roda
04:03 < gleki> je'uja'aizo'onaipei
04:04  * gleki that last compund cmavo will go into history
04:05 < Amnadya> la vreji cu rejgau gaje lo nahe cinri gi lo cizra je lo banli
04:06 < zipcpi> {dektenfa} is weirdly defined; I'm not sure what x2 is for?
04:14 < gleki> where is the list of all selmaho and subselmaho?
05:04 < zipcpi> vlaste: bitni {gimka}
05:04 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/bitni+%7Bgimka%7D
05:04 < zipcpi> vlaste: bitni (gimka)
05:04 < vlaste> zo bitni gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo bitni gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
05:04 < zipcpi> I think I like {bitni}; matches {baitni}, and reminds one of {klani}
05:05 < zipcpi> And don't have the {birti/bitri} problem
05:06 < zipcpi> Yeah sounds like "beatnik" but I don't think that's an issue. "beatnik" is hardly gimy'inda :p
05:11 < gleki> a female gismu, i see
05:11 < zipcpi> u'i
05:14 < gleki> en: bitri
05:16 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
05:17 < gleki> lmw is superslow
05:23 < gleki> jb: bitni
05:23 < mensi> bitni = bitni — x1(entity)  is  x2(number)  bits in size
05:23 < mensi> :lo se bitni — bit (data).
05:23 < mensi> :lo vi vreji cu bitni lo kilto — This file is 1000 bit.
05:23 < mensi> :Related words: datni
05:23 < gleki> as you wish
05:24 < zipcpi> ki'e
05:26 < gleki> en: bitni
05:27 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
05:27 < gleki> en: baitni
05:27 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
05:29 < zipcpi> la jbovlaste cu maltarti za'ure'u .i li'a tolnei kanpe lo nu mi jmina ai ji'imuno valsi
05:41  * nuzba @uitki: L17-03 - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/L17-03 by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1HS7H25]
05:41  * nuzba @uitki: L17-04 - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/L17-04 by Gleki [http://bit.ly/1HpcTWy]
05:49 < zipcpi> I'm getting these errors: Couldn't open temporary html file; check your definition for unbalanced dollar signs or other wierd characters.
05:51 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/kilto
05:54 < gleki> report to github
08:32  * nuzba @garydale: Fahrenheit 1600: The Amazon servers take even more heating… Alltop is hot for the funny. Cartoon via H... http://bit.ly/1HpVcq1 #lojban [http://bit.ly/1HSqIBq]
08:34 < durka42> ckini la lojban ba'e ma
09:01 < gleki> la'a fi'o xanri ra la lojban cu du la cnino ve tavla
09:01 < gleki> ku noi du la nuspik
09:02 < gleki> Fiction: At the GruntWerx Board of Directors Meeting:  http://bit.ly/1IRyUON  #lojban
09:02 < gleki> cizra
09:04 < gleki> http://cogas.github.io/hajiloji/article/nunctu/18.html
09:04 < gleki> melbi
09:04 < durka42> ua
09:05 < gleki> mo i djica lo ka fanva fi lo glico ibo xu
09:07 < durka42> mi na se bangu
09:08 < gleki> la gugl cu mo
09:08 < durka42> uat
09:09 < gleki> la gugl transleit cu mo
09:09 < durka42> la'a tolcertu
09:09 < gleki> xu vajni va'o nu do jimpe fi le ralju bangu
09:10 < gleki> i ko larcu je satci be na fanva
09:46  * nuzba @octophore: I reflexively trust Esperanto enthusiasts more than Lojban enthusiasts [http://bit.ly/1HiwMj2]
10:18  * nuzba @Nubobot42: @lucasq_ eu falo em lojban [http://bit.ly/1HSgOlj]
10:21 < gleki> ue
10:21 < gleki> i lo zmiku xu
10:23  * nuzba @Nubobot42: Lojban retweeted you [http://bit.ly/1HShBmg]
10:29 < durka42> y
10:30 < durka42> bu'u lo sotygu'e...
10:39 < zahlman> ra'oi sot rafsi ma
10:39 < mensi> y no da se tolcri
10:39 < gleki> uesai
10:39 < gleki> rafsi:sot
10:39 < mensi> y no da se tolcri
10:39 < gleki> i oi la mensi cu spofu
10:39 < zahlman> ue ii la mensi cu menli
10:40 < zahlman> i spuda lo preti
10:40 < gleki> ra'oi sot rafsi ma
10:40 < mensi> zo so'u se rafsi zo'oi sot
10:40 < gleki> di'a tolspofu
10:40 < zahlman> io
10:42 < zahlman> ni'o mo
10:43 < gleki> la lojban co'a mabla
10:43 < gleki> i mu'a zo li co'a smuni dunli zo cu
10:44 < gleki> alta: lo jbocre li jai fenki
10:44 < mensi> ([FA {lo <jbocre NF> KU}] [li {jai <fenki NF>} VAU])
10:46 < zahlman> ii
10:46 < zahlman> NF mo
10:48 < gleki> sinxa lo famyma'o pe lo me'oi noun
10:48 < gleki> NF ... ku => noun
10:48 < gleki> NF vau => verb
10:49 < zahlman> si'au na sarcu
11:23 < gleki> sarcu lo nu fanva fi lo glico a lo simsa
11:26 < durka42> ta'i ma cusku lo namcu .u'i
11:32 < gleki> alta: li mu li jai se o'unmo
11:32 < mensi> ([FA {li <mu BOI> LOhO}] [li {jai <se (¹o'unmo NF¹)>} VAU])
12:03 < sorpaas> Is {la .ibu mo} a valid Lojban cmene? Can I say {la .ibu mo cu mo}?
12:04 < gleki> exp: la ibu mo
12:04 < mensi> ([la {<(¹i bu¹) BOI> mo} KU] VAU)
12:04 < gleki> ^
12:04 < gleki> it is
12:04 < zahlman> ue
12:04 < gleki> la ... ku
12:04 < zahlman> si uenai mi bebna
12:05 < gleki> one of Lojbanists has the name {la mokau}
12:05 < zahlman> tatpi ji'a oi
12:06 < durka42> lo mo pe ibu
12:07 < sorpaas> But {la .ibu} is not valid. Am I correct?
12:08 < durka42> correct
12:09 < sorpaas> ui
12:18 < noncomcinse> coi
12:37 < gleki> coi
12:58 < sorpaas> exp: la go'i cu mo
12:58 < mensi> ([la go'i KU] [cu {mo VAU}])
12:59 < sorpaas> exp: la mo cu mo
12:59 < mensi> ([la mo KU] [cu {mo VAU}])
13:09  * nuzba @la_taun: ti ba'e NA pe'i cinmo condi pe'a pemci! .i zbalermorna .i srilermorna .i .a'iru'e ze'i finti .i mu'o #lojban http://t.co/eN7Mkou63h [http://bit.ly/1KVhzL2]
13:46 < sorpaas> I'm just trying to explore wired things... What place structure does {nei} have? What does it mean if I say {mi tavla nei do}?
13:47 < sorpaas> exp: mi tavla nei do
13:47 < mensi> (mi [CU {tavla nei} {do VAU}])
13:48 < samcinki> coi la .sorpa'as.
13:52 < sorpaas> coi
13:53 < sorpaas> coi la .samcinki.
13:56 < Ilmen> Hi Sorpaas!
13:57 < Ilmen> ze'a lo barda na vitke
13:58 < Ilmen> Did you get the email I sent you several months ago?
13:59 < Ilmen> As for {nei}, it's a brika'i (pro-bridi ~ pro-sentence), so it hasn't any intrinsic place structure.
14:00 < sorpaas> No, I probably didn't :(
14:00 < Ilmen> {mi tavla nei do} --> {mi tavla tavla nei do} --> {mi tavla tavla tavla nei do} --> ... — This seems to be infinitely recursive.
14:00 < Ilmen> Oh.
14:00 < Ilmen> Let me check.
14:01 < sorpaas> Oh, you mean "zy zei voksna"? Yeah, I found it!
14:01 <@xalbo> Worse, it's {mi tavla ke tavla nei ke'e be fa mi bei do do} etc
14:01 < Ilmen> I've sent it to you on 2015-01-31, and it was titled "zy zei voksna"
14:02 <@xalbo> It's like standing between two mirrors.
14:02 < sorpaas> Thanks for the voksa!
14:02 < durka42> na nei
14:02 < Ilmen> sorpaas: Okay, happy to know you successfully received it.
14:02 < sorpaas> {nei} sounds extremely fun!
14:03 <@xalbo> durka42: Dammit, now I need to reboot the universe again.
14:03 < Ilmen> .u'i
14:04 < Ilmen> This one is worth being added to the IRC pearls
14:06 < Ilmen> ta'o ma nuzba lo jbogu'e
14:07 < Ilmen> en: morgana
14:07 < mensi> morgana = x1 is a mirage/Fata Morgana |>>> selpahi
14:09 < Ilmen> ŭe zantufa zmiboto
14:11 <@xalbo> There is a baseball player whose last name is "Trumbo". Every time I see it, I can't see it as anything other than a slinku'i.
14:11 < Ilmen> ba'a nai zo morgana pagbu su'o selsa'a pe la'au za'o li'u
14:15 < Ilmen> In a similar fashion, everytime I hear the French sentence pattern « Tout le monde n'est pas [predicate] » (= naku ro da [predicate]), I've the persistent feeling of there being a logical scope error .u'i
14:16 < Ilmen> s/tout/tous  --mute fenki
14:21 < Ilmen> "Tout le monde n'est pas..." = "Not everybody is..." = naku roda...  So it feels like a scope error, although it seems it isn't because it's a set expression
14:23 < Ilmen> en: asfalte
14:23 < mensi> asfalte = x1 is asphalt/bitumen |>>> See tarla |>>> selpahi
14:25 < Ilmen> ji'a pagbu lo selsku pe su'o selsa'a .i cinri koinsidensi .i ka'e jijyni'i lo du'u lo selsa'a cu se ciska pu za lo masti be li so'i
14:34 < Ilmen> .i .oi ti'e vi ba zi di'a tcima glare mutce ze'a lo bramau be lo pa jeftu soi mabla
14:34 < Ilmen> .o'o
14:35 < Ilmen> mu'o mi'e monlogo'ysku
15:21  * nuzba @BWACG: Hey #Lojban speakers, a Lojban StackExchange site has been proposed http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture?referrer=onNWtue0kWMRAmkuNTrNeQ2 [http://bit.ly/1HSKJK4]
17:34 < ctefaho> camxes: pujenaicajeba
17:34 < camxes> ([{pu <(¹je nai¹) ca> <je ba>} KU] VAU)
17:34 < ctefaho> cll is really fun sometimes
17:34 < ctefaho> calling that a "word"
17:41 < ctefaho> co'o
18:30 < _mukti_> coi jbopre
18:31 < ComradeBecca> coi la mukti
18:53 < _mukti_> ue coi la .bekas.
19:21 < vultrue> Ìû
19:21 < _mukti_> iu dai
19:22 < _mukti_> cpana
20:13 < zipcpi> Crazy thought: Can brivla be trademarked?
21:28 < ocimar> hi
22:35 < gleki> tcika lo nu smaji
--- Day changed Sat Jul 11 2015
00:55 < le_jatna> mi viska le nei, I see myself?
00:56 < gleki> yes
00:57 < gleki> not a usual style for Romance languages and English, but normal for e.g. Slavic languages
00:57 < le_jatna> What about, I see a reflection of myself
00:57 < Tirifto> Hello!
00:58 < gleki> "I see a reflection of myself" - mi viska lo minra be vo'a
00:58 < gleki> i'd use {vo'a} here beause it always refers to the main clause ({mi viska} in this case)
00:58 < gleki> hello, Tirifto
00:58 < Tirifto> Question: When I want to accent a syllabe, do I need to capitalize all its letters (ex. lojBAN), or is the first one enough (ex. lojBan)?
00:59 < Tirifto> (Accent as in put emphasis on it/prolong it)
00:59 < le_jatna> ki'e
00:59 < gleki> usually you capitalize the whole syllable but these days a usual stress mark like e.g. ` is more popular
00:59 < gleki> although in general marking stress in Lojban is a very rare practice
01:00 < Tirifto> I see. Changing stress won't change meaning of the word, right?
01:00 < gleki> wont change, yes
01:00 < gleki> and that's the explanation why it isnt popular
01:01 < Tirifto> I see :P
01:01 < Tirifto> Also, how do I use the ` mark? Do I put it before/after the syllabee, or add it to vowels?
01:01 < gleki> i guess like in English, before the vowel
01:03 < Tirifto> ` is used in English/
01:03 < Tirifto> ?*
01:04 < gleki> in English the stress mark is used beforre the stressed thing, in some other languages after
01:05 < Tirifto> I see
01:05 < gleki> it's not ` of course. it's something else which i dont have on my ASCII keyboard :/
01:05 < Tirifto> Ohh
01:06 < gleki> Some Lojbanists just use diacritic marks for stress
01:06 < gleki> which is even more problematic for me in particular
01:06 < Tirifto> This thing? ˈ
01:07 < gleki> http://selpahi.de/
01:07 < gleki> ^ this is an example of Lojban with stress marked using diacritic marks
01:08 < gleki> melbi (pretty) although not easy to use by everybody
01:08 < Tirifto> I see. What difficulties does it bring to some people?
01:08 < gleki> for me is that i dont have such a keyboard since i work from different devices including smartphones
01:09 < gleki> not everywhere i can install the necessary software
01:09 < Tirifto> Ah
01:10 < Tirifto> So is that method generally discouraged?
01:11 < gleki> with diacritics? no, not discouraged. it's readable, it's easy to be used by computer programs analyzing the structure of Lojban text. It's just that not all can use it.
01:13 < Tirifto> Okay! One more question: Do people sometimes use words from lojban vocabulary as names?
01:13 < Tirifto> (Or pseudonyms)
01:13 < gleki> yes
01:13 < gleki> mi'e la gleki
01:13 < gleki> = I'm Happy
01:13 < gleki> where "Happy" is a personal name
01:14 < gleki> (as opposed to "happy")
01:14 < Tirifto> Does the "la" distinguish it from a non-name?
01:15 < gleki> {la} is a prefix word making names
01:15 < gleki> gleki = to be happy
01:16 < gleki> lo gleki = someone happy (noun)
01:16 < gleki> la gleki = Happy (personal name)
01:16 < Tirifto> Oh I see, I mistook it with lo at first.
01:18 < Tirifto> If one was to have multiple names (ex. name surname), do they put "la" in front of each one (la name la surname), or just in front of the first one (la name surname)?
01:18 < gleki> only one {la} is necessary
01:19 < gleki> each {la} creates one name
01:19 < gleki> My full nickname is {la gleki arxokuna}
01:19 < gleki> "Happy Raccoon" literally although it shouldn't be translated.
01:22 < Tirifto> That is a nice name! https://lut.im/5ZZPhZxi/dQSzPquf
01:23 < Tirifto> Thank you for your help! :)
01:24 < gleki> je'e (= You are welcome!)
01:24 < gleki> oh, where did you find my photo, zo'o (= kidding)
01:25 < Tirifto> That's a secret >.>
01:26 < Tirifto> And one more thing: Is the ' pronounced as the IPA/Esperanto "h"?
01:26 < gleki> Usually yes.
01:27 < Tirifto> Okay, thanks!
01:27 < gleki> It *can* be pronounced as any other frricative phoneme not already used by any other Lojban  letters. E.g. voiceless "th" or voiceless "wh" but that's rarely used.
01:29 < gleki> mensi: doi Amnad https://github.com/lagleki/glekitufa/blob/master/cilretci/README.md
01:29 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.Amnad.gy. di'a cusku da
01:33 < gleki> mi de'a jundi
01:33 < gleki> (I pause listening)
02:20 < Amnadya> mi nenri lo sorpeka
02:20 < mensi> Amnadya: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: https://github.com/lagleki/glekitufa/blob/master/cilretci/README.md |
02:20 < mensi> 2015-07-11T08:29:33.921Z
02:21 < Amnadya> jehekihe la gleki
02:30 < Amnadya> i pu fliba tau lo jai se platu sorpeka kihu lo bebna krinu noi mi nohe fuzme i mi ca nenri lo drata sorpeka noi klama ba tau lo jai se platu sorpeka za lo cacra be li ci
02:31 < Ilmen> .oi dai
02:33 < Ilmen> .i .a'o na ku do denpa tau lo sorpeka bu'u lo glare dukse ze'a lo cacra be li ci
02:36 < Amnadya> na fasnu i kuhi tohe kihu nai mabla ikihubo pu nitcu loka erve lo cnino pikta noi kargu sai je noi mutce kargymau lo pamoi
02:36 < Ilmen> .i mi zo'u ca lo prulamdei lo na se kanpe fasnu cu selja'e lo nu mi nitcu lo ka denpa ze'a lo cacra fau lo nu lo solri cu dirce darxi pe'a je bu'u lo glare mutce je fau lo nu lo se ralte djacu cu cmalu
02:37 < Ilmen> s/cacra/cacra kei  to ko smaji doi la fenki toi
02:37 < fenki> Ilmen meant to say: .i mi zo'u ca lo prulamdei lo na se kanpe fasnu cu selja'e lo nu mi nitcu lo ka denpa ze'a lo cacra kei  to ko smaji doi la fenki toi fau lo nu lo solri cu dirce darxi pe'a je bu'u lo glare mutce je fau lo nu lo se ralte djacu cu cmalu
02:37 < Ilmen> :/
02:37 < Amnadya> oidai
02:41 < Ilmen> ta'e spaji mi fa lo nu lo .irci cu .irci fau lo nu zvati lo marce
02:42 < Amnadya> cnino mijiha
02:42 < Ilmen> .i mi frimo'i lonu ca da su'o .irci cu .irci tavla fau lo nu sisku lo nicte marbi gi'e na snada
02:44 < Amnadya> ie mi morji
02:44 < Amnadya> i pu sfehero
02:45 < Ilmen> .i pu stidi lodu mi fonxa tavla lo pendo be vo'a .i ku'i mi jungau lodu mi na se bangu lo mapti .i ku'i ba ku ba'a nai snada loka marbi facki kei xoi lo .irci be lo drata cu sidju
02:45 < Amnadya> ie
02:52 < Ilmen> mi na birti lodu xukau zabna fa lonu ze'e kibro jundi ku'i .i za'a so'i da pe lo cabycedra fau lo nu denpa co se sruri lo drata cu jundi lo samfonxa gi'e na jikca troci vau ja'e lo nu simlu loka pe'a zvati lo drata munje
02:52 < Amnadya> taho au pei cpacu lo selsaha selsku pe la Djemynai i xu noda do pu dunda be ru i mi djuno ia lodu do na kakne loka erve
02:52 < Ilmen> .i ji'a lo nu ka'e ku ca ro da lo drata ka'e foxycpe cu la'a fanza
02:53 < Ilmen> ru'a ru'e
02:53 < Amnadya> ie
02:53 < Amnadya> kahe je puhi kibro dukse
02:53 < Amnadya> fa lo remna
03:01 < Ilmen> mi ca na ka'e terve'u .i ku'i .a'o ba kakne .i lo se finti be la .djem. cu banli dukse lo nu mi na ckire dunda su'o da kei ĭa .i ji'a mi da'i na se pluka lo nu jvarivbi cpacu lo selsa'a selsku .i ji'a xamgu fa lo nu selsku smadi ta'i lo ka tinju'i
03:01 < Ilmen> *dukse fi
03:02 < Amnadya> do nobli zaha
03:02 < Amnadya> mi sinma
03:03 < Ilmen> to zo jvarivbi .a'u pei toi
03:03 < Ilmen> je'e
03:03 < Amnadya> mi jimpe
03:04 < Ilmen> pe'i pei mapti lo si'o me'oi cheat
03:04 < Amnadya> pu na pensi loduxukau xagrai valsi
03:04 < Amnadya> ahu uhi
03:05 < Ilmen> va'o lo nu na mabla dukse zo'u mi jmina .ai
03:05 < Amnadya> javrihi sei pajvo
03:08 < Amnadya> mojriha mi lodu aidji loka jmina zo zvasku noi cohe lu zvati sisku lihu
03:08 < Amnadya> je noi ba fengygau la uuzit
03:09 < Ilmen> .u'i je'e
03:09 < Amnadya> i mi ba pilno sebahi zo mitysisku noi lo tarmi mi fegli
03:10 < Amnadya> i lo smuni cu simsa kuhi
03:11 < Ilmen> jbo: sisku
03:11 < mensi> sisku = x1 zukte da lo nu x1 facki lo du'u ma kau poi me x3 cu ckaji x2 |>>> srana fa zo facki .e zo zvasisku .e zo
03:11 < mensi> mitysisku |>>> Ilmen
03:12 < Amnadya> ua zo zvasisku zasti
03:12 < Amnadya> na morji
03:13 < Ilmen> .u'i se'i lo zgike pe la'au ki'e li'u snipa lo mi besna .i lo galto'a voksa cu simlu lo ka cusku zo ki'a ku mi xoi xajmi
03:13 < Amnadya> uhi mi pu kanpe
03:26 < Ilmen> .ai mi citka ta'o .i co'o di'ai do .i mi gleki lo nu casnu
03:27 < Amnadya> jehe i raho
04:10 < gleki> ue lo jbocre cu tavla zu'ai
04:11 < Amnadya> uhi iepei coha tolcafne
04:11 < mensi> ei mi tugni
04:12 < Amnadya> sihau glitce
04:14 < Amnadya> zo zihe morsi i koi zo zihe jmive
04:14 < Amnadya> i mi zgana su nu pilno
04:15 < gleki> oi do li pilno la tcekitau
04:17 < Amnadya> cohaku soha jbocre cu gohi  i ei mi fukpi tarti
04:17 < Amnadya> doi li zei prenu
04:19 < gleki> cohaku so'o jbopre cu pante
04:20 < gleki> i ta'o bu'u la'oi #espanol da pu cusku zo'oi nombre ije bazibo mi pensi de
04:21 < gleki> ne lo lujvo
04:21 < Amnadya> jetahe noroi jbosku
04:22 < Amnadya> ihu
04:36 < Amnadya> ei mi ma te cmene lo malgli pagbu be la itkuhile ma ca lonu tavla fe muha la kixadas i lo na jbopre na jimpe tau zo malgli
04:37 < Amnadya> s/mi ma/mi
04:37 < fenki> Amnadya meant to say: ei mi te cmene lo malgli pagbu be la itkuhile ma ca lonu tavla fe muha la kixadas i lo na jbopre na jimpe tau zo malgli
04:38 < gleki> According to G. Cinque the relative order or Tense, Aspect, Mood rafsi is preserved the same across languages. which means that it's possible to find fixed slots and thus create naturalistic lujvo with meaning predictable from its slot structure. but /(de'a / ka'e)+/ isn't immediatly clear to me.
04:39 < gleki> https://www.dropbox.com/home/loi%20cukta?preview=ENG+Cinque%2CG.+-+Adverbs+and+Functional+Heads.pdf
04:41 < gleki> or https://www.academia.edu/2679553/Again_on_Tense_Aspect_Mood_morpheme_order_and_the_Mirror_Principle_
04:42 < gleki> by this rule {co'a ca} is to be fixed into {PU co'a ca} and probably {ca co'a ca}
04:55  * mumble_ jorne co'a fa la'o fa menli fa
05:18  * mumble_ jorne co'u fa la'o fa menli fa
05:18  * mumble_ jorne co'a fa la'o fa menli fa
05:40  * nuzba @uitki: La Bangu: Lojban Dictionary with Examples - http://mw.lojban.org/papri/La_Bangu:_Lojban_Dictionary_with_Examples by Gleki - /* Types of places */ [http://bit.ly/1JaFZu7]
06:07 < Amnadya2> zutse je zutse je zutse
06:18 < gleki> tersmus: zutse je zutse je zutse
06:18 < tersmus> <<zutse(_)>{je}<zutse(_)>(_)>{je}<zutse(_)>( )
06:18 < gleki> i'enai
07:00 < niftg> coi
07:02 < Ilmen> coi
07:03 < niftg> la'a lo cabdei ke jbobau nu vokta'a cu mulno pu
07:04 < gleki> xu pu nu tavla zu'ai
07:07 < Ilmen> je'u nu'o voksnu ca lo cabdei
07:08 < Ilmen> .i ku'i mi za'o jundi .i ku'i la'a mi ba zi klama lo bartu
07:09 < niftg> .ua snuti nonseka
07:09 < Ilmen> ni'o mi pu zi finti lo ti kibypapri — http://mw.lojban.org/papri/UserWiki:Ilmen/la_nu_bevri_do
07:09 < Ilmen> .i'u dai .i mi pu cnegau joi cu dragau vau so'o da
07:10 < gleki> zo'oi UserWiki mabla gi'e glico
07:13 < niftg> ta'o .uinai la zbaga mi noda spuda
07:13 < Ilmen> ŭe ru'e
07:15 < niftg> xu do snada lo nu zvati la zbaga doi za'o jundi
07:15 < Ilmen> mi je'a jundi nau ca'a
07:15  * mumble_ jorne co'u fa la'o fa menli fa
07:15  * mumble_ jorne co'a fa la'o fa menli2 fa
07:16 < Ilmen> cizra
07:16  * mumble_ jorne co'a fa la'o fa menli2 fa
07:16  * mumble_ jorne co'a fa la'o fa vreji fa
07:16 < Ilmen> doi la .niftyg. mi ca lifri lo simsa nabmi
07:17 < Ilmen> .i ku'i mi ka'e nerkla .i va'o bo po'o lo nu pilno zo'oi 84.73.73.130  .enai zo'oi zbaga.ax.lt:64738
07:17 < cliva> niftg: Ilmen: si'au da pe DNS pe la zbaga cu nabmi .i ku'i za'a la jinme bunkere di'a .akti
07:18 < Ilmen> je'e pei la .niftyg.
07:18 < Ilmen> .e'u gau do zo'oi 84.73.73.130 basti zo'oi zgaga.ax.lt
07:18 < niftg> je'e je'e
07:18 < Ilmen> *zbaga
07:19 < Ilmen> je'e la cliva
07:19  * mumble_ jorne co'a fa la'o fa SuperUser fa
07:19  * mumble_ jorne co'u fa la'o fa SuperUser fa
07:19 < Ilmen> ta'o .ai mi me do si si cliva si'a
07:20 < cliva> je'e
07:20 < cliva> .i mi ca lo cabdei na zifre tu'a la mumble .i la'a ca lo bavlamdei ja'a co'e
07:20 < Ilmen> je'e
07:21  * mumble_ jorne co'a fa la'o fa niftyg fa
07:21 < Ilmen> .i ba'a mi zifre lo ka voksnu ca lo bavlamdei ku ji'a
07:22 < Ilmen> s/voksnu/vokta'a
07:22 < fenki> Ilmen meant to say: .i ba'a mi zifre lo ka vokta'a ca lo bavlamdei ku ji'a
07:22 < Ilmen> co'o ta'o
07:22 < cliva> jetcyco'o
07:22 < niftg> je'e co'o
07:23 < niftg> snuti snada co jvokatna
07:23 < cliva> .u'i
07:23 < niftg> .u'u katna gi'e ku'i na gismu ciksi
07:38 < niftg> .uinai lo ni mi pixokauroi catra cu te zmadu lo ckuliki lo fetyja'a manti poi se nalci gi'e cliva troci
07:49 < gleki> cinri fa lo nu zo zu'ai na kakne tu'a lo se xi pa broda
07:54 < gleki> For those of you curious to hear the Ithkuil language sung to music, or who are interested in progressive-rock music in general, I have just published a video on YouTube of the first track from the forthcoming album by Kaduatán (the Ithkuil word for “Wayfarers”), the music project I’ve been working on for the past year and a half.
07:54 < gleki> https://youtu.be/KM-r-4dIMic
07:54 < gleki> </quote>
08:02 < _mukti_> Perhaps conlangers can band together and get some attention for the conlang music boom.
08:02 < mensi> _mukti_: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: pls disable VisualEditor and TweetAnew | 2015-07-11T12:28:55.
08:02 < mensi> 681Z
08:02 < _mukti_> First a lojban rap album, now ithkuil progressive rock?
08:06  * nuzba @_angelesperanto: Ŝajnas al mi preskaŭ pli facile lerni la latinan ol lojban! Ĉu iu esperantisto instruos lojban al mi per interreto? [http://bit.ly/1Hmv1DK]
08:10  * nuzba @lojban_org: @_angelesperanto jes, bonvolu uzi IRC-kanalon #lojban en freenode: http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/irci/ [http://bit.ly/1HmvRQU]
08:10 < _mukti_> coi ue la selpa'i
08:11 < selpahi> coi
08:11 < selpahi> .i mi pu zi mo'u xrukla lo zdani
08:11 < janAnken> Saluton?
08:11 < _mukti_> fi'i dai
08:11 < _mukti_> coi la'o zoi jan anken zoi
08:11 < janAnken> Mi ne scipovas ankoraŭ la lojbanan lingvon bedaŭrinde.
08:12 < gleki> Saluton
08:12 < selpahi> Cxu vi volas lerni gxin?
08:12 < janAnken> Jes.
08:12 < selpahi> :)
08:12 < gleki> Cxu vi volas lerni gxin *nun*?
08:12 < selpahi> .u'i
08:12 < janAnken> Okej
08:12 < selpahi> bone
08:12 < janAnken> Ĉu .u'i estas "amuza"?
08:13 < gleki> {u'i} estas interjekcio
08:13 < gleki> ~= "amuze"
08:13  * gleki ni bezonas traduki cnima'o en E-on
08:13 < selpahi> ~= lol / haha
08:14 < janAnken> Kompatinda _mukti_. Li ne povos daŭre babili lojbane nun.
08:14 < gleki> kial?
08:15 < janAnken> Ni estas ĉi-tujmesagile babilante esperante.
08:15 < gleki> ah, kompreneble
08:15 < gleki> _mukti_: cxu vi komprenas nenion?
08:16 < _mukti_> mi parolas iomete
08:16 < gleki> janAnken: kiajn lingvojn vi parolas?
08:17 < janAnken> La hispana kiel denaska lingvo, ankaŭ scipovas tokiponon kaj iom esperanton kaj la anglan. Mi studas nunteme tokiponon, la anglan, esperanton kaj la klasiklatinan.
08:18 < janAnken> Kiaj?
08:18 < gleki> kiujn
08:18 < gleki> sed ni povas paroli en la angla
08:18 < janAnken> Maybe...
08:18 < janAnken> I'm not sure if I will understand you.
08:19 < gleki> i think it's the first or the second time someone tried to learn Lojban from Esperanto. Before that i saw only attempts to do that in Japanese, French, Russian
08:19 < gleki> most textbooks are in English http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Learning/en
08:19 < gleki> We are lazy to translate them into Esperanto
08:19 < janAnken> I was trying to learn this language with an english written book and I couldn't. The spanish translation is horrible.
08:20 < gleki> you may choose another resource from the link above.
08:20 < gleki> another book
08:20 < selpahi> Kaduatán is cool. It sounds like Finnish when pronounced like that :)
08:20 < gleki> janAnken: and then ask questions here
08:20 < janAnken> I have a question.
08:21 < gleki> re'i (=Listening, ready to receive)
08:21 < gleki> janAnken: go on
08:21 < janAnken> What is the exact sound for “.” is it a click, glotal sound stop or simply a no-noise time.?
08:22 < janAnken> I can't express myself correctly. 😞
08:22 < gleki> glottal stop or a short pause
08:22 < gleki> "a no-noise time" as you said, yes. You may also use that
08:22 < janAnken> What is more common? Glotal or pause?
08:22 < gleki> pause
08:23 < janAnken> How are you?
08:24 < gleki> I'm fine :)
08:24 < janAnken> Who* sorry
08:25 < janAnken> Are you the owner of “@lojban_org”?
08:25 < gleki> Ehm, what do you mean?
08:25 < janAnken> Have you answered me?
08:25 < gleki> oh, yes and no. Iy's a shared account. Several people use it.
08:25 < gleki> oh, yes and no. It's a shared account. Several people use it.
08:25 < xajmi> coi
08:25 < gleki> But that reply was from me, yes.
08:25 < gleki> xoi la xajmi
08:25 < gleki> sa
08:25 < gleki> i coi la xajmi
08:26 < xajmi> coi la gleki
08:26 < xajmi> coi rodo
08:26 < janAnken> I come in a moment.
08:26 < _mukti_> la xajmi .e la gleki cu zvati .i ku'i la xalbo cu zvati ma
08:26 < janAnken> Okey
08:27 < gleki> za'a la'oi VisualEditor mo'u cliva
08:27 < _mukti_> go'i
08:27 < gleki> i ku'i la'oi TweetAnew na co'e
08:27 < _mukti_> Really, I turned that off, too.
08:28 < janAnken> I was in my smartphone. Could you send me again the links? I have lost them.
08:28 < gleki> i ua i ie
08:28 < gleki> janAnken: mw.lojban.org/papri/Learning
08:28 < _mukti_> I also turned off parsoid. I think that will help with the performance.
08:28 < gleki> _mukti_: so'u da pu pilno i seki'u bo na pu mutce vajni i ku'i ca ti mi bilga lo ka finti lo drata tutci pe la tu'iter
08:28 < xajmi> mi jmisre la jbobau ku
08:29 < _mukti_> .i'e
08:29 < gleki> Actually we need textbooks in Simple English
08:29 < _mukti_> ua nai dai doi la xajmi
08:30 < janAnken> I have to learn the real British English. So :(
08:30 < janAnken> I must.
08:30 < xajmi> mi rapcreze'a
08:30 < xajmi> Good luck with that janAnken
08:30 < janAnken> Thanks.
08:31 < janAnken> I think I have B1
08:31 < janAnken> Do you know many lojban spanish speakers?
08:31 < gleki> lo munje zo'u so'i da se bangu lo glico poi su'eva'e lo ni sampu
08:32 < xajmi> I am a spanish soeaker... but there are not many
08:32 < xajmi> are you?
08:32 < gleki> janAnken: Jorge Llambias from Argentina, Dank Writer (nickname) from somewhere idk
08:32 < janAnken> Yes
08:32 < janAnken> Soy español
08:32 < janAnken> From Spain I mean
08:32 < xajmi> hola janAnken, soy latino
08:33 < janAnken> Hablas lojban?
08:33 < xajmi> estoy aprendiendo
08:33 < janAnken> Is Jorge Lambias Dank Writer?
08:33 < xajmi> es por pura curiosidad... primera vez que veo a otro que habla español aqui
08:33 < _mukti_> coi la durkavore
08:33 < janAnken> It has no sense
08:33 < xajmi> no lo conozco
08:33 < janAnken> JAJAJA
08:34 < durka42> coi
08:34 < janAnken> LA primera vez que entro aqui
08:34 < gleki> janAnken: no, those are two persons
08:34 < xajmi> coi durka42
08:34 < janAnken> La segunda vez que intento empezar a aprender lojban
08:34 < _mukti_> ca lo cabdei ma'a se bangu lo spano .e lo spero
08:34 < gleki> ie
08:34 < durka42> ca lo cabdei mi cliva seka'a lo dotygu'e
08:34 < _mukti_> ua .i'e
08:34 < xajmi> algo que funciona es tratar de traducir cosas que ya sabes
08:35 < janAnken> Dice que hay otros nativo español, Jorge Lambias
08:35 < xajmi> por ejemplo trate de escribir el cuento de la caperucita roja en lojban
08:35 < gleki> xu do aidji lo ka penmi la jboberlinpre doi la durkavore
08:35 < janAnken> Pero hablas ingles tu?
08:35 < durka42> .au
08:35 < _mukti_> http://tiki.lojban.org/tiki/la+cmalu+je+xunre+mapku
08:35 < xajmi> claro... sino no podria entender lojban
08:36 < xajmi> of cpurse
08:36 < xajmi> *course
08:36 < gleki> u'i
08:36 < janAnken> When should I use "le"?
08:37 < gleki> 1. you may always use {lo} and not {le}
08:37 < xajmi> its a plural of "la"
08:37 < _mukti_> ue
08:38 < janAnken> I have just read "le" in several lojban sentences!!
08:38 < gleki> 2. if you really want to use it then it's the same as {lo} but mentioning things in context, e.g. already mentioned, that you have on your mind.
08:38 < gleki> as for plural it's {za'u} in Lojban
08:38 < gleki> {lo mlatu} = cat/cats
08:38 < xajmi> le means "the ones known as..." its a plural "article"
08:38 < gleki> {lo pa mlatu} = cat, one cat
08:38 < gleki> {lo za'u mlatu} = cats (plural)
08:38 < _mukti_> The older dialects of lojban preferred {le}. It's meaning in contemporary lojban is the subject of quite a bit of discussion.
08:39 < _mukti_> coi ui la menli
08:39 < Ilmen> coi
08:39 < janAnken> "lo" is the plural of "la"
08:40 < janAnken> why "lo pa mlatu" is "one cat"?
08:40 < janAnken> la mlatu ???
08:40 < samcinki> "lo" is not the plural of "la".
08:40 < _mukti_> The most prolific lojbanist these days tend not to use {le} at all.
08:40 < _mukti_> (lojbanists)
08:40 < xajmi> "lo" just takes the "x1" position of any selbri...
08:40 < gleki> {la} creates names
08:40 < gleki> la rozgu = Rose (personal name)
08:40 < gleki> lo rozgu = rose (flower)
08:41 < xajmi> "lo gerku" means "that which is dog/dogs"
08:41 < gleki> 08:40 < janAnken> why "lo pa mlatu" is "one cat"? <-- well, that's how Lojban is made :)
08:41 < _mukti_> {lo pa mlatu} is, more precisely, "that which is a cat and is counted as one, in the way that cats are counted"
08:41 < gleki> xajmi: or simply "dog/dogs"
08:41 < janAnken> lo is used to refer to something which has been said in x1 before, isn't it?
08:42 < gleki> it's the most generic particle, so rather no.
08:42 < gleki> in English or Spanish terms it just makes nouns out of verbs.
08:42 < janAnken> A xajmi que te llamas Jaime no?
08:42 < xajmi> "pa" is the lojban word for one, and "lo" transforms a selbri (verb) into a sumti (noun), so "lo pa mlatu" means "that one cat" or something similar
08:43 < xajmi> No... xajmi means "funny"
08:43 < gleki> sazri = to drive, conducir
08:43 < gleki> lo sazri = driver(s), conductor(es)
08:43 < selpahi> Hello again. Could someone please send me the logs for the last two weeks? My logging facility went down while I was on vacation.
08:43 < xajmi> mi nobre es Darío (dari.o)
08:43 < xajmi> *dari.os
08:44 < xajmi> *nombre
08:44 < selpahi> dari'os / dariios
08:44 < janAnken> Okey, I think I have understand lo
08:45 < janAnken> understood
08:46 < xajmi> not "dari'os"... that puts an unnecessary "h" between "i" and "o"... "dari,os" might be better, but the coma is not exactly accepted in lojban so I use a dot "dari.os"
08:47 < xajmi> Any of you understands lojban very well?
08:47 < xajmi> or are the experts gone?
08:47 < selpahi> The dot makes it two words, the first of which is actually two cmavo
08:47 < selpahi> dari.os = da ri .os.
08:48 < gleki> experts are still here
08:48 < _mukti_> indeed, right now :)
08:48 < xajmi> Oh... thanks... I will use the coma then, because I don't really like the "h" in the middle... sorry about that
08:48 < _mukti_> so'o jbocre cu zvati
08:49 < janAnken> Every word which starts with a vocal has a dot before that letter?
08:49 < xajmi> _mukti_ can you help me with something?
08:49 < selpahi> You can also say {dariios}, which is /da.ri.jos/ in IPA
08:49 < gleki> selpahi: e'u do na ciksi lo cnino javni vau u'i
08:49 < selpahi> If you don't want the h.
08:49 < _mukti_> xajmi: Sure, but I'm not one of the experts. :)
08:49 < gleki> xajmi: just ask questions. someone will answer
08:49 < xajmi> thanks sepahi
08:49 < xajmi> *selpahi
08:50 < durka42> coi ls selpa'i
08:50 < durka42> la*
08:51 < janAnken> Every word which starts with a vocal has a dot before that letter?
08:51 < xajmi> I want to say "grandma leaves using a motor bike"
08:51 < xajmi> I try to say that with "lo rirmanta ku klama fu lo matra relxilma'e ku"
08:51 < xajmi> is it right?
08:52 < selpahi> Yes. (rirmamta)
08:52 < gleki> *rirmamta
08:52 < selpahi> janAnken: Yes. The dot represents a glottal stop.
08:53 < janAnken> a glottal stopa made by the glotis or only a silence time. (being quiet) isn't it?
08:54 < _mukti_> janAnken: In general, yes, but combinations like {ui} and {ii} which start with a consonant sound (help me out, linguists!) don't require the dot
08:54 < xajmi> yes a dot is just a "silent pause"
08:54 < durka42> semivowel*
08:54 < _mukti_> Damn. I typed that then doubted myself.
08:54 < janAnken> u and i consonants??
08:54 < selpahi> This is the first time I don't feel like reading a two-week log file...
08:55 < gleki> in {ui} {u} is usually pronounced as "w"
08:55 < _mukti_> {ui} sounds like english "we", french "oui", etc.
08:55 < gleki> in {ii} the first {i} is like "y" in Spanish "soy"
08:55 < selpahi> {u} before another vowel is [w] (IPA), and {i} before another vowel is [j] (IPA)
08:56 < xajmi> janAnken and _mukti_ I think that the dot is used to separate words, specially qhen they start with a vowel, because they can sound similar to a diphtong
08:56 < xajmi> *when
08:56 < janAnken> thanks
08:57 < janAnken> How many time someone has to spend to speak lojban?
08:57 < xajmi> ii suena parecido a decir "yi" en español
08:57 < _mukti_> Somewhere mixed into all of that is the idea that, in theory at least, lojban could be written without spaces.
08:57 < xajmi> I think this video might come in handy...
08:58 < xajmi> wait a second
08:58 < gleki> _mukti_: do u have a ready to use tool showing the intensity of this channel in different hours over the last months?
08:58 < _mukti_> Nothing ready to use but it wouldn't be hard to whip something up given the logs.
08:58 < gleki> _mukti_: measured by the number of messages/unique users in a given hour
08:58 < xajmi> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0yGdNEWdn0
08:58 < gleki> hm, logs ...
08:58 < _mukti_> Did someone help selpahi with those, BTW?
08:59 < gleki> _mukti_: i have logs but in certain days there were disrupted. this can damage stats
08:59 < gleki> i ie mi mo'u benji fi la selpa'i
09:00 < gleki> if we combine logs from different people this can decrease deviation
09:01 < gleki> _mukti_: i think i can provide you with the logs but i think it'd be necessary to split the output by weeks so that deviations are easily seen
09:01 < xajmi> why everyone has gone quiet?
09:02 < janAnken> Aprender con hipnosis??
09:02 < xajmi> no
09:02 < xajmi> u'i u'i u'i
09:02 < gleki> it's weekend here on this planet, so maybe that's why
09:02 < gleki> i just wanted to leave btw
09:02 < xajmi> basicamente tienes que practicar... asi practiques mal
09:03 < xajmi> you want to leave gleki?
09:03 < gleki> janAnken: do you use facebook too??
09:03 < xajmi> yes
09:03 < gleki> xajmi: i will return, my account will be still connected
09:03 < janAnken> I don't use it too much...
09:04 < xajmi> oh... OK... thanks for the heads up gleki ...
09:04 < xajmi> I don't connect with facefook here
09:05 < xajmi> te interesan los idiomas janAnken?
09:05 < xajmi> aparte de lojban claro...
09:05 < janAnken> Si... ingles, español, tokipona, esperanto, lojban y latin es con los que estoy ahora
09:05 < janAnken> tambien empece japones, frances, portugues y aleman.
09:06 < xajmi> oi'o
09:06 < janAnken> oi'o?
09:07 < xajmi> oi'o = "fuck!!!"
09:07 < janAnken> jajajajaj por que??
09:07 < xajmi> ouch... cuantos idiomas
09:07 < janAnken> Los de abajo no tengo ni idea y de lojban tampoco
09:07 < Ilmen> Hola
09:07 < janAnken> xajmi tu dia de suerte
09:07 < janAnken> otro que habla español
09:08 < xajmi> hola limen
09:08 < janAnken> Hola Iilmen
09:08 < janAnken> llmen
09:08 < janAnken> IImen
09:08 < xajmi> hablas español? or would you rather english?
09:08 < Ilmen> ¿Estás nuevo por aquí?
09:08 < janAnken> No se si me preguntas a mi o a iimen
09:09 < xajmi> Ilmen
09:09 < xajmi>  yo he venido un par de veces... janAnken creo que si es nuevo, y la pregunta era para Ilmen
09:10 < Ilmen> Hablo ambas, luego no me importa
09:11 < xajmi> u'i ... gracioso
09:11 < Ilmen> Cierto, estoy más comfortable con inglés
09:11 < xajmi> no problem... I speako ingleso too... u'i
09:12 < xajmi> (by the way that was a joke)
09:13 < Ilmen> En este canal, se puede utilizar cualquiera lengua, en tanto que se trata de Lojban.
09:13 < xajmi> buen punto...
09:13 < xajmi> para practicar les parece si contamos chistes en lojban?
09:13 < Ilmen> O se puede hablar en Lojban a propósito de qualquiera cosa
09:15 < Ilmen> ju'o ro nu jbobau tavla cu se zanru
09:15 < janAnken> Yo como no entiendo una mierda me voy a poner a leer el famoso libro ese aunque sea en ingles. Ya preguntaré dudas por aquí.
09:15 < Ilmen> (Por cierto, qualquier hablar en Lojban está bienvenido aquí)
09:15 < janAnken> I can't speak due to I don't know Lojban
09:16 < xajmi> janAnken
09:16 < xajmi> espera
09:16 < Ilmen> do se bangu la tokpona ku ji'a xu  —  Hablas usted Toki Pona también?
09:17 < janAnken> Yes, mi toki e toki pona
09:17 < xajmi> toki pona no hablo
09:17 < Ilmen> je'e  — Okay
09:17 < janAnken> sina li toki ala toki e toki ni?
09:17 < xajmi> podriamos traducir lo que estamos diciendo en lojban
09:18 < Ilmen> ma'a ka'e fanva lo se cusku lo jbobau
09:18 < janAnken> Eso estaría bien.
09:18 < Ilmen> da'i zabna
09:18 < selpahi> da'i xamgu
09:18 < Ilmen> (Lo que digo está traducción de lo que diced)
09:18 < Ilmen> *decid
09:19 < Ilmen> ŭe coi la selpa'i fi'i
09:19 < xajmi> da'i xamgu  = supongo que esta bien
09:19 < selpahi> lo pu se cusku be mi cu xe fanva lo pu se cusku be do
09:20 < selpahi> coi la .ilmen.
09:20 < selpahi> .i mi mo'u xrukla je ca tatpi
09:22 < Ilmen> Esta demasiado raro que se habla en español por aquí, luego me precipito tan pronto como veo que aguien está hablando español jejeje
09:23 < xajmi> do tatpi ma?
09:23 < Ilmen> lo nu litru ku ru'a
09:23 < selpahi> ie
09:23 < selpahi> .i ze'a lo cacra be li za'u xa cu litru ne'i lo sorpeka
09:24 < xajmi> do tatpi ma? = tu cansado por? (por que estas cansado)
09:24 < Ilmen> .oi dai .i ditybra
09:24 < selpahi> .i ji'a ti'u li 4:30 co'a cikna
09:24 < selpahi> .i mi xa'o jungau do lo du ma kau pu fasnu
09:24 < selpahi> .i lo jai se platu sorpeka cu co'e li'o
09:24 < Ilmen> mi sanji
09:25 < selpahi> .i se jalge lo nu lo nunlitru cu zenba lo ka ditcu
09:25 < Ilmen> .i .au dai dorsipna
09:25 < selpahi> .u'i
09:25 < selpahi> .au .i ku'i lo drata ca cinrymau
09:26 < Ilmen> je'e
09:26 < janAnken> You speak a lot.
09:26 < janAnken> hahaha
09:26 < janAnken> congratulations
09:26 < xajmi> i don't speak that much... just a little
09:26 < Ilmen> jaja sí, como puedes ver, se puede hablar rápido en Lojban
09:27 < Ilmen> Sólo se necesita practicar
09:27 < Ilmen> Como con qualquiera otra lengua
09:28 < janAnken> ya...
09:28 < janAnken> creo que es dificil lo de fa fe fi fo fu y lo de las posiciones
09:29 < _mukti_> es raro que se usen todas las posiciones
09:29 < xajmi> mmm... siempre es mejor tener un diccionario al lado para recordar las posiciones... mira este http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/ o este http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/index.html#
09:30 < janAnken> gracias
09:31 < Ilmen> No tan difícil; por ejemplo en la frase inglesa, "I gave you something", solo la pocisión de los argumentos indica sus papeles
09:31 < xajmi> fi'i
09:31 < xajmi> = you are welcomed (de nada)
09:32 < janAnken> ya...
09:32 < janAnken> gracias?
09:32 < _mukti_> fi'i -> bienvenido
09:32 < Ilmen> gracias = ki'e
09:33 < Ilmen> je'e = bien, he comprendido lo que has dicho
09:34 < Ilmen> es: je'e
09:34 < mensi> je'e = [COI] vocativo: recibido (reconocimiento) - reconocimiento negativo; usado para reconocer ofertas y
09:34 < mensi> agradecimientos |>>> xorxes
09:34 < janAnken> la primera posicion va siempre justo delante del selbri?
09:35 < xajmi> janAnken si quieres aprender lojban (o cualquier idioma) tienes que usarlo de alguna forma que te haga recordar las cosas (por ejemplo, si te gusta ver peliculas puedes ver una en el idioma que estas aprendiendo,aunque en lojban no es muy practico)
09:35 < xajmi> site gusta escribir, puedestratar de escribir algo en español y luego tratar de traducirlo a lojban
09:35 < janAnken> Si, eso lo hago con ingles. En los otros idiomas no hay mucha pelicula que ver... latin, esperanto, tokipona... escojo unos idiomas muy raros jajaja
09:35 < Ilmen> janAnken: el ordeno de los argumentos está muy liberado
09:36 < xajmi> coi ctefa'o
09:37 < xajmi> fi'i
09:37 < ctefa`o> coi la xajmi
09:37 < selpahi> coi
09:37 < ctefa`o> ue coi la selpai
09:37 < Ilmen> mi do viska (Yo te veo) = viska do fa mi ("veo tú yo") = do se viska mi (estas visto por mí), etc
09:37 < Ilmen> @ janAnken
09:38 < ctefa`o> .i mi bloti klama
09:38 < janAnken> mi viska do?
09:38 < Ilmen> El ordeno de los argumentes no es rígido
09:39 < Ilmen> "mi viska do" también es correcto
09:39 < Ilmen> "yo veo tú"
09:39 < Ilmen> (te veo)
09:39 < janAnken> vale, el lugar del selbri da igual si estan bien ordenados los sumti
09:39 < xajmi> mi bloti klama = I vehiclel-ing go?
09:40 < Ilmen> "I boat go"
09:40 < Ilmen> (I go via boat)
09:40 < Ilmen> ta'o za'a ca lo cabdei ro ba'u da litru
09:40 < ctefa`o> .i falnu bloti
09:40 < selpahi> ctefalnu bloti
09:40 < ctefa`o> .u'i
09:41 < astroendjisai> Hi. I have a question. Is there a selbri for anything like "x1 convinces x2 to do x3"?
09:42 < ctefa`o> It is... interesting how I have better phone 3G-connection out in the Skärgård than at home
09:42 < Ilmen> I may go for {djigau} (make+want)
09:42 < _mukti_> en: birtygau
09:42 < mensi> bitygau [< birti gasnu ≈ Certain bring about] = g1 convinces/persuades b1 that b2 is true.
09:42 < _mukti_> Not to do something, though...
09:43 < Ilmen> "x1 makes x2 certain that x2 has to do x3", maybe
09:44 < astroendjisai> I suppose I could make it more complicated and say something like "convince that it is a good idea to do"
09:44 < selpahi> jinvygau / kricygau / birtygau / tugnygau
09:46 < Ilmen> astroendjisai: Lojban's vocabulary is still growing, and there's still missing useful words, it's why anybody can create new words and add them to the dictionary
09:46 < Ilmen> The alternative to creating a new word is to use paraphrasis
09:47 < _mukti_> I stumbled on "persuade" a lot during the Diplomacy game.
09:47 < astroendjisai> I'd love to create a new word, but I don't feel I know the language well enough to do so.
09:47 < xajmi> well I gotta go now
09:48 < janAnken> bye
09:48 < _mukti_> co'o di'ai la xajmi
09:48 < xajmi> rodo zdifri
09:49 < xajmi> co'o
09:50 < _mukti_> .i mi di'a jundi ki'u lo nu lo gerki cu djica lo nu barkla
09:50 < Ilmen> X makes Y certain that Y should do Z  =  X birtygau Y lo du'u Y .iancu Z
09:50 < Ilmen> je'e .i .a'o zanfri
09:50 < Ilmen> astroendjisai ^
09:50 < astroendjisai> Okay. Let's try a workaround. .i mi tadni la .lojban. .i mi na'e kakne lo su'u lo tadni la .lojban. ku xamgu sidbo
09:51 < gleki> "to convince" in some of its meanings can also be {bapli}
09:51 < astroendjisai> No I did something wrong
09:51 < Ilmen> Here, "lo tadni" fills sidbo's x1
09:51 < Ilmen> and a student is not an idea ;-)
09:52 < gleki> I can't?
09:52 < gleki> maybe I don't think that studying Lojban is a good idea?
09:53 < Ilmen> {mi na jinvi lo du'u da prali fi lo nu tadni lo jbobau} = I don't opine that there's a benefit to studying Lojban
09:53 < astroendjisai> I'm going for "I can't convince anyone that studying lojban is a good idea" but I can see that I've screwed up here. I'm gonna move to the computer and try again. Maybe I'll have better luck when I'm not on my phone.
09:54 < gleki> mi na kakne lo ka gau ce'u da jinvi lo du'u lo nu tadni la lojban cu xamgu sidbo
09:54 < gleki> long
09:54 < Ilmen> {mi na ka'e birtygau fi lo du'u xamgu fa lo nu tadni lo jbobau} = I can't convince that it's good to study Lojba
09:54 < Ilmen> n
09:54 < Ilmen> (you can also use "djigau" instead of "birtygau")
09:54 < Ilmen> (djigau = make want)
09:55 < Ilmen> (djica+gasnu)
09:55 < Ilmen> <Ilmen> {mi na ka'e birtygau fi lo du'u xamgu fa lo nu tadni lo jbobau} = I can't convince that it's good to study Lojban
09:55 < Ilmen> (you can also use "djigau" (make want) instead of "birtygau")
09:56 < astroendjisai> What's the place structure of djigau?
09:56 < Ilmen> na ka'e = cannot;   lo du'u + bridi = that + subsentence;  xamgu fa lo nu ... = it is good that...
09:57 < Ilmen> djigau / djicygau would mean "x1 makes x2 wants x3 to happens / to be the case"
09:58 < Ilmen> mi djigau do lo nu do barkla  =  I make you want that you go-out
09:59 < astroendjisai> .i zo'e fliba
09:59 < _mukti_> mi na snada lo ka birtygau da lo du'u xamgu fa lo nu cinri fi la .lojban.
10:00 < Ilmen> (djigau is a regular lujvo, it's basically a shorthand for "gasnu lo nu djica" = make want...)
10:00 < durka42> co'o .i la'a lo za'umoi be zo coi pe mi cu se cusku bu'u lo dotygu'e
10:00 < selpahi> di'ai !
10:00 < _mukti_> ko snura litru
10:00 < durka42> ki'e
10:01 < Ilmen> zabna doi la .durkas.
10:01 < Ilmen> di'ai ri no'u ko
10:01 < Ilmen> .i mi zo'u .ai de'a jundi
10:01 < Ilmen> co'o
10:01 < _mukti_> coi .ibu
10:01 < _mukti_> co'o
10:01 < Ilmen> co'oi
10:02 < _mukti_> Apparently it's opposites day for me.
10:02 < _mukti_> When I say {coi} I mean {co'o}, {di'a} for {de'a}, etc.
10:04 < _mukti_> mi skudji lo dukti be lo se cusku be mi
10:04 < astroendjisai> So _mukti_ says... "I do not succeed in convincing anyone that it is good to be interested in lojban?" I'm genuinely confused here, how is la .lojban. the x2 of cinri here?
10:04 < _mukti_> Hey, you're getting good already. Yes, I messed up.
10:05 < _mukti_> I meant {cilre}, but on reflection, {tadni} is better here
10:05 < _mukti_> mi na snada lo ka birtygau da lo du'u xamgu fa lo nu tadni la .lojban.
10:06 < astroendjisai> Okay, so that means "I do not succeed in convincing anyone that it is good to study Lojban"
10:07 < _mukti_> Yes.
10:07 < astroendjisai> Yay! Thank you people. Now, why can I not find birtygau in the dictionary but I can find bitygau?
10:09 < gleki> they mean the same
10:09 < gleki> its actually the same word
10:10 < gleki> {bitygau} is shorter so it's in the dictionary
10:12 < astroendjisai> Ah, okay. Cool. .i mi ckire ro do
10:14 < _mukti_> Oh, I didn't even notice that I used the expanded version.
10:14 < _mukti_> I was just thinking {birti} + {gasnu}
10:15 < _mukti_> I knew there was a lujvo, but I forgot it was shorter
10:16 < _mukti_> coi la barda xirpre
10:16 < gleki> now you force me to think of rss-to-twitter script
10:17 < _mukti_> .u'u mi ja bapli tu'a do
10:17 < _mukti_> s/ja/jai
10:17 < fenki> _mukti_ meant to say: .u'u mi jai bapli tu'a do
10:18 < gleki> do ce mi jai bapli tu'a mi
10:18 < gleki> i mi ji'a pu cpedu
10:19 < _mukti_> Oh, that's old {ce} !
10:19 < _mukti_> Took me a moment to parse.
10:20 < gleki> now it's called "old"...
10:20 < _mukti_> na cafne fa lo nu da viska lo lojbo selcmi
10:21 < gleki> zo jo'u clani
10:21 < _mukti_> Well, I called it that, anyway. Because these days when I see {ce} it tends to be {ce'u}
10:23 < _mukti_> So I am interested to know if disabling parsoid helps with the wiki performance. I suspect you will let me know. :)
10:23 < selpahi> la .xorxes. cu stidi lo du'u zo joi basti zo jo'u
10:23 < gleki> zo joi pu se smuni lo drata vau ienaipei
10:23 < mensi> ei mi tugni
10:24 < _mukti_> xu ca stidi
10:25 < gleki> selpahi: ko na co'u morji fi la mupli doi lo pilno ba la'oi PooLearning
10:25 < gleki> *be
10:25 < selpahi> mi na tolmo'i
10:25 < selpahi> .i ko na co'u morji lo du'u mi pu zi sai xrukla
10:25 < gleki> mi morji
10:25 < gleki> i sa'u
10:25 < gleki> mu'o
10:27 < _mukti_> pe'i zo joi cu mutce lo ka se pilno .i to'e mupli fa mu'a zo ce
10:27 < gleki> if anyone else has objections or suggestions related to ASCII table in Lojban please do. because i want to include parts of it into my dictionarymw.lojban.org/papri/ASCII_table_keys_names
10:27 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ASCII_table_keys_names
10:32 < _mukti_> Also: In  (X joi Y cu broda), {broda} is non-distributively predicated of {X joi Y}, right? Whereas with (X jo'u Y cu broda), distributivity is elided. No?
10:33 < _mukti_> So if {joi} and {jo'u} were merged we would need to explicitly invoke {gunma} to get explicit collectivity?
10:34 < _mukti_> Seems like the opposite direction of xorlo ... towards singularizers.
10:34 < _mukti_> Which is why I asked if it's something he proposes currently.
10:34 < gleki> yeah, i suppose {joi} is for masses although CLL uses {joi} in casnu1
10:36 < _mukti_> gleki: That doesn't surprise me since the classic definition of {casnu} calls for a "mass"
10:36 < gleki> in la bangu several days ago i renames this and other similar places to "group"
10:36 < _mukti_> And "classic" is the word I should have used re: {ce}, not "old".
10:36 < gleki> *renamed
10:37 < gleki> so all {ce}-capable places are now called "group"
10:37  * gleki cepable
10:37 < gleki> The place structure of “casnu” is:
10:37 < gleki> casnu: the mass x1 discusses/talks about x2
10:37 < gleki> so the x1 place must be occupied by a mass (for reasons not explained here)
10:37 < gleki> [https://lojban.github.io/cll/14/15/]
10:38 < _mukti_> There's definitely a need for a term which avoids the more entangled terms like "mass" and "set".
10:39 < gleki> {abu ce by casnu} and {abu joi by casnu} have different meanings to me with the second being pragmatical nonsense. although several days ago scientists managed to connect brains of several mice into one entity
10:40 < gleki> well, "group" in the recent terminology is what can go into simxu1 and casnu1
10:40 < _mukti_> {abu joi by casnu} makes sense to me if {casnu} describes a non-distributive relationship
10:40 < gleki> maybe a lojbanic term needed for that
10:41 < _mukti_> If casnu means something like "is a discussion group"
10:41 < gleki> _mukti_: isn't it a mixture of abu and by, whereas what is intended here is {simxu lo ka ce'u ce'u tavla}?
10:41 < _mukti_> (which is how I understand it, pretty much)
10:41 < gleki> hm
10:41 < gleki> maybe then
10:42 < _mukti_> Well, the CLL definition of a mass is inherently problematic with the assertion that the mass has all the properties of every member of the mass, so if we're going to make any sense of it, I think we need to exclude that.
10:42 < gleki> then {abu ce by} and {abu joi by} is a useful distinction
10:43 < gleki> {abu joi by} is more similar to saying {lo re prenu cu casnu}
10:43 < _mukti_> As I recall, CLL is non-committal about what kinds of things can actually be predicated of a set.
10:43 < _mukti_> (aside from membership)
10:43 < gleki> mi e do casnu, mi ce do casnu, mi joi do casnu, lo re prenu cu casnu - 4 cases, all are useful
10:44 < _mukti_> I understand {abu cu by cu casnu} as something like {lo gunma be abu .e by cu casnu}
10:45 < _mukti_> Oops, messed that up
10:45 < _mukti_> I mean {abu joi by cu casnu}, of course
10:45 < gleki> looks like
10:48 < gleki> mailed to mriste about lmw
10:49 < _mukti_> On reflection, I would suppose that {abu} and {by} are quantified, so {pa gunma be .abu .e by} might be more accurate
10:49 < gleki> *bei
10:50 < gleki> oh
10:50 < gleki> sorry
10:50 < gleki>  i see
10:52 < _mukti_> Assuming that I'm not interested in the idea that .abu and by might actually comprise more than one {casnu gunma}...
10:52 < selpahi> Quantfied?
10:53 < _mukti_> Can you have an unquantified reference?
10:53 < _mukti_> Assuming, btw, that abu and by are references
10:55 < _mukti_> I guess I should walk back those assumptions.
10:55 < _mukti_> .i mi nelci lo cakla .i ku'i cy boi palci
10:56 < gleki> due to recent rants about LI I'm instead removing letteral anaphora from la bangu
10:57 < _mukti_> I'm conflating anaphora and reference
11:01  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: このトピック面白いな…。ロジバンの口語としての姿が書かれている    https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban-soudan/jvNvLR5d5oM [http://bit.ly/1HuEfe4]
11:01 < Ilmen> "PooLearning" .u'i
11:02 < Ilmen> ta'o doi la selpa'i — http://mw.lojban.org/papri/UserWiki:Ilmen/la_nu_bevri_do
11:02 < gleki> yes, i successfully launched a new online education resource.
11:18 < _mukti_> .i ue mi viska lo cmene be do doi la gleki do'u bu'u lo mutpapri pa la'o zoi NooLearning zoi
11:19 < _mukti_> .i xu do djuno lo du'u su'o prenu pe nyly ba vitke lo jbosla
11:19 < xajmi> excuse me, does this means what i think it means? (warning swearing ahead)
11:19 < xajmi> do e'o ko gletu do
11:20 < _mukti_> s/vitke/vitke fi/
11:20 < fenki> _mukti_ meant to say: .i xu do djuno lo du'u su'o prenu pe nyly ba vitke fi lo jbosla
11:20 < _mukti_> The first {do} isn't necessary, but otherwise, yes it does suggest a certain action which is difficult to perform nonkansa
11:21 < _mukti_> To be precise, it requests it
11:21 < xajmi> u'i u'i u'i
11:22 < xajmi> hilarious
11:22 < xajmi> thanks
11:22 < _mukti_> "Please copulate with yourself"
11:22 < xajmi> exactly... hilarious
11:22 < xajmi> thanks for clearing that up
11:22 < _mukti_> Now it could be argued -- and hell, I'll do it -- that this is not in an of itself a hostile thing to say, since {gletu} in lojban doesn't inherently imply {mabla}
11:23 < _mukti_> Which is to say, you could be requesting that the person achieve a healthy and enjoyable sexuality
11:25 < _mukti_> And as I think about it more ... I'm not sure it's desirable to assume that theres any reason that x1 and x2 in gletu couldn't co-refer... that may be creeping heteronormativity
11:25 < selpahi> ua je'e la .ilmen.
11:25 < selpahi> .i mi morji
11:25 < selpahi> .i lu bevri lo nu mi'o pensi'u li'u za'o melbi mi
11:33 < Ilmen> melbi mi ji'a
11:35 < Ilmen> doi la selpa'i lo krasi prosa cu co'e zoi ponbau いつかきっと出会う僕らを乗せて ponbau .i valsi panra fa lu bevri mi'o noi pensi'u li'u .i ku'i ĭa lu bevri lo nu mi'o pensi'u li'u smuni mapti zmadu gi'e melbi zmadu
11:36 < selpahi> je'e
11:36 < Ilmen> sa'u lo rarbau poi slabu mi cu jai cafne fai lo ka se nandu tu'a lo simsa be lo'u bevri lo nu le'u
11:36 < Ilmen> .i la'a basti fa lo panra be lu bevri ko'a noi co'e li'u
11:37 < Ilmen> mu'a
11:38 < Ilmen> mu'o mi'e di'a jundi
11:38 < selpahi> je'e
11:46 < Ilmen> mi nelci lo krasi selsa'a .i mi ri so'o roi sanga .i ri fanmo lo .anlime skina be lo nu lo re verba cu litru te zu'e lo nu zvafa'i lo dzena ke vofli daplu noi zo .laputas. cmene
11:49 < Ilmen> be'o noi cmene fa lu la .laputas. noi tsani mradi'u li'u
11:54 < Ilmen> .i .oi vi ku la ka vacri glare dukse zo'u pu ku zvati fa ri .i je ba ku zvati fa ri ja'a ku
11:54 < Ilmen> ti'e
11:55 < selpahi> .u'i
11:55 < selpahi> .oi dai
12:08 < xajmi> co'o
12:44  * mumble_ jorne co'u fa la'o fa menli2 fa
12:57 < ctefa`o> Fun fact: I have suddenly started speaking more "old"/formal swedish
12:57 < ctefa`o> Too much jbo exposure surely
13:25  * mumble_ jorne co'a fa la'o fa menli2 fa
13:40 < astroendjisai> I was just gonna be here to lurk but now I have a question. I'm seeing in a word definition z1, z2, z3, etc. rather than x1, x2, x3, etc. Is there a difference in meaning there?
13:40 < _mukti_> Yes, you're probably looking at a lujvo (compound word) ?
13:40 < astroendjisai> That's correct.
13:41 < _mukti_> So, by convention, in giving the place definitions of the lujvo, the corresponding places in the component words are identified by the initials
13:41 < _mukti_> en: skudji
13:41 < mensi> skudji [< cusku djica ≈ Mention desire] = d1 means/intends to say c2 to c3 via medium c4. |>>>
13:41 < mensi> arj
13:42 < _mukti_> skudji = cusku + djica so that d1 corresponds to the first place in djica, c2 to the second place in cusku and so on
13:42 < _mukti_> does that make sense?
13:42 < astroendjisai> Yes, that makes perfect sense.
13:47 < astroendjisai> So... .i coi .i lo nu mi jundo ro do kei ku terzu'e lo nu mi zvati kei ku .i xu la'edi'u drani
13:47 < astroendjisai> *jundi
13:48 < selpahi> drani
13:48 < astroendjisai> .ui
13:48 < _mukti_> .i'e
13:49 < astroendjisai> And am I correct in guessing I can elide pretty much every terminator there?
13:49 < selpahi> Almost... nu jundi ro do terzu'e is a tanru, so not there.
13:50 < astroendjisai> Okay. So the 'selbri word' doesn't have to be right next to the other one to form the tanru.
13:51 < selpahi> Well, nu jundi ro do kei is a selbri, and terzu'e is a selbri. They are next to each other
13:52 < astroendjisai> Oh oh okay now I get it. And I couldn't just elide the kei?
13:52 < selpahi> No, because it gets auto-inserted as late as possible, which is after {ro do}
13:53 < selpahi> The {terzu'e} can't be part of the abstraction anymore, because it already contains another selbri
13:53 < selpahi> So the abstraction has to end, and that's where {kei} gets auto-inserted.
13:53 < selpahi> Ah, you meant just saying {ku}?
13:54 < astroendjisai> Yeah, that's what I meant.
13:54 < astroendjisai> Only elide the kei, I suppose. That would have been more accurate.
13:54 < selpahi> Yes, you can do that. The {ku} has nothing else to close but the {lo}
13:54 < selpahi> And {kei} is inside it, so it's the same.
13:55 < astroendjisai> Okay, so the most 'trimmed down' version of that sentence would be: .i lo nu mi jundo ro do ku terzu'e lo nu mi zvati
13:55 < astroendjisai> *jundi
13:55 < astroendjisai> Bah I just copied and pasted and forgot about my typo
13:56 < selpahi> Yes
13:56 < astroendjisai> ckire
14:05 < Ilmen> ju'i plise si si coi cilre
14:21  * mumble_ jorne co'u fa la'o fa niftyg fa
14:24  * mumble_ jorne co'u fa la'o fa menli2 fa
14:24 < astroendjisai> .i lu si  .i pluka mi
14:25 < Ilmen> zo si xu pluka do
14:25 < Ilmen> .i ma bangu do
14:25 < Ilmen> .a'u
14:26 < astroendjisai> .i la .gliban. bangu mi
14:27 < Ilmen> spagetufa: ro lo ma'a datka cu lalxu limna va
14:27 < spagetufa> ([FA {<ro BOI> <lo (¹NE ma'a¹) datka KU>}] [cu {<lalxu limna> <(¹va KU¹) VAU>}])
14:27 < Ilmen> .i'u nai cnino zmiku
14:27 < Ilmen> je'e la .astros.
14:28 < selpahi> so'i bultufa
14:29 < Ilmen> bultufa ki'e si ki'a
14:29 < selpahi> bu'a zei gentufa
14:30 < selpahi> gentufa zantufa ilmentufa spagetufa
14:30 < Ilmen> .i ca lo cabdei no nu voksnu cu fasnu .i ku'i ka'e cabna lo bavlamdei
14:30 < Ilmen> je'e
14:30 < selpahi> je'e
14:30 < selpahi> .i mi pu kucli
14:30 < Ilmen> je'e
14:30 < selpahi> je'e
14:30 < Ilmen> .i la'a lo nu mi notci benji fliba cu rinpau
14:31 < selpahi> ki'u ma lo prenu za'o nitcu tau lo notci .i sa'u dikni
14:31 < selpahi> .i na nandu
14:31 < Ilmen> .u'i ĭe
14:33 < _mukti_> .i ta'o mi pu pacna lo nu jbota'a ca lo cerni
14:34 < _mukti_> .i cumki fa tu'a lo bavlamdei
14:34 < Ilmen> ŭa .i ku'i la'a cabna lo nu mi darno lo skami
14:34 < Ilmen> .i ke'u ba'a mi vokta'a zifre ca lo bavlamdei
14:35 < _mukti_> je'e .i a'o mi kansa do
14:36 < Ilmen> je'e .i ja'o .ai mi ranji jundi la zbaga pe la .mambl.
14:37 < selpahi> xu .itku'ile vokta'a
14:37 < Ilmen> nau zo'u tcika lo nu mi sipna zukte
14:37 < selpahi> (to ju'i nai toi)
14:40 < Ilmen> .i mi senpi lo nu .itku'ile vokta'a ca lo tai cabjbi kei .u'i .i ku'i lo nu tcidu fi lo .itku'ile papri cu stodi lo ka pagbu lo mi .aiste .i cumki fa lo nu ca da la terdi cu bevri lo nu mi'o .itku'ile voksnu .u'i ĭa cu'i
14:43 < Ilmen> .i .e'i mi snada lo ka jimpe lo na'e frili javni pe lo nu jungau lo du'u ma kau slaka gi'e se basna
14:43 < selpahi> .u'i
14:43 < selpahi> koi pacna fa mi'o
14:49 < selpahi> ie lo basna lerfu javni cu pluja
14:50 < selpahi> á - ko basna, à - ko na basna
14:51 < Ilmen> je'e .i ku'i lo nu se zunti lo mokca re mei lefpau cu rinka lo nu na'e frili .i .a'o ka'e ciska zo'oi ö́ mu'a zo'o ru'e
14:52 < selpahi> ie
14:54 < selpahi> zoi fa. attàwîl .fa ji'a xamgu mupli
14:55 < selpahi> î = clani .i'y-zei-sance .i ku'i ji'a ki'u tau zoi ta. à .ta lo ro moi slaka cu se basna
14:56 < Ilmen> je'e .i ku'i ma togmo'a sinxa
14:57 < selpahi> lo tonga na srana lo du'u basna ma kau
14:57 < Ilmen> tugni
14:57 < selpahi> .i lo tonga lerfu cu lidne lo valsi
14:57 < Ilmen> ŭa
14:57 < selpahi> no lerfu = farlu tonga
14:58 < Ilmen> je'e
14:58 < selpahi> li'o li'o .i ku'i
14:58 < Ilmen> cuxycau tonga
14:58 < selpahi> sei vajni la .itku'ile cu se stika ja'e lo nu lo tonga cu cenba lo ka se pilno fi ma kau
14:58 < Ilmen> ca lo cabjbi xu
14:59 < selpahi> ba'o je'u
14:59 < selpahi> .i jalge fa lo nu ji'i ro se xusra pe lo cukta cu ca jitfa
14:59 < selpahi> (to poi srana lo tonga toi)
14:59 < Ilmen> ku'i ba'a la .itku'ile julne cu sarxe lo vifne traji klesi
15:00 < selpahi> .i ku'i mi zanru (to ra'u toi) .i mi pu no'e nelci lo laldo tonga bo ciste
15:00 < Ilmen> je'e
15:00 < selpahi> na sarxe
15:00 < selpahi> .i la .kixadas. pu'o ningau
15:00 < selpahi> .i sa'e ... ba jmina lo PDF sfaile
15:01 < Ilmen> ki'e kajde
15:01 < selpahi> sa'u ko tolju'i lo srana be lo tonga
15:01 < selpahi> .i rau drata vajni cu zasti
15:02 < selpahi> .i pu ku lo tonga cu tutci lo no'e cinri be mi
15:02 < selpahi> .i lo cnino cu cinrymau
15:02 < selpahi> .i ku'i pe'i spofu
15:02 < selpahi> .u'i .oi
15:02 < Ilmen> .itlokuti ĭe nai pei ju'o nai
15:02 < selpahi> na srana
15:02 < Ilmen> je'e .i ja'o mi mo'ifli
15:03 < selpahi> wî = ca'e zei .itlokuti
15:03 < selpahi> we = ko'oi
15:03 < selpahi> etc
15:03 < selpahi> .i na dukse lo ka pluja
15:03 < Ilmen> ei = ei  (ba'anai ru'e)
15:03 < selpahi> attàwîl
15:03 < selpahi> ie .u'i
15:04 < selpahi> -> ca'e rinsa
15:04 < Ilmen> .a'u je'e
15:04 < selpahi> lo .itlokuti cu jbini lo genrkasu joi lo .y gunma rafsi
15:05 < selpahi> igral = citka, igrawel = ko citka
15:05 < selpahi> .infikse
15:05 < Ilmen> je'e
15:05 < selpahi> fu'au dai zo'o
15:06 < selpahi> .y fu'i dai  *
15:08 < selpahi> Ein-n igraswa kei.
15:08 < selpahi> (to ia drani toi9
15:08 < selpahi> toi) *
15:08 < selpahi> -> .ei do citka
15:09 < selpahi> .u'i lo lojbo cu cmalu
15:09 < Ilmen> la .kixadas. da'i jilra zo'o
15:10 < selpahi> Ei igral ku. -> do [zukte lo ka] de'a citka
15:10 < selpahi> ei = de'a
15:10 < selpahi> .i cfipu xu zo'o
15:11 < Ilmen> na'e cfipu .i ba'a lo si'o bilga kei rafsi cu bi'ai .infikse
15:11 < Ilmen> soi jalge fa lo nu na'e .ambigu ru'a
15:11 < selpahi> jetnu
15:12 < selpahi> ei igral == an-nei igral
15:13 < Ilmen> je'u pei la .itku'ile cu claxu tau zo co'u .i da'i cizra fa lo nu ku'i je'a co'e zo de'a
15:13 < selpahi> vs ein-n igral
15:13 < selpahi> an-n vs ei-nn
15:13 < Ilmen> za'a
15:13 < selpahi> ein-n *
15:13 < selpahi> .i ji'a, an-n igral == igral
15:14 < Ilmen> zo'oi - ma sinxa
15:14 < selpahi> .claxu zo co'u poi sumtcita .i na claxu lo .aspekte
15:14 < Ilmen> je'e
15:14 < selpahi> Ü igral -> co'u citka
15:15 < selpahi> n-n zo'u, sinxa lo du'u slaka karsna
15:15 < Ilmen> je'e
15:15 < selpahi> .i re mei fa lo ny zei sance
15:15 < selpahi> .i .ei bacru ro lo re mei
15:16 < Ilmen> xu zo'oi nn cu sinxa su'o drata
15:16 < selpahi> .i do'e lo .adjunte lo re moi be lo ny zei lerfu cu se basna ro roi
15:16 < selpahi> go'e
15:16 < selpahi> .i geminate
15:16 < selpahi> sei lazni
15:16 < Ilmen> je'e
15:17 < selpahi> an-n -> [an.'n] IPA
15:17 < selpahi> ua pei
15:18 < Ilmen> xu lo pa moi ny zei zunsna cu se zifygau pu tau lo re moi
15:18 < selpahi> pe'i na go'i
15:18 < selpahi> .i po'o pagu lo drata slaka
15:18 < selpahi> pagbu*
15:18 < Ilmen> je'e
15:23 < Ilmen> ki'e te gusni be lo .itku'ile tcila
15:23 < selpahi> je'e
15:23 < selpahi> .i .oi mi tatpi
15:23 < Ilmen> .i .ai mi klama lo senva munje .i .a'o lo nicte cu ricfu lo ka stidi lo cfika sidbo do
15:23 < selpahi> ki'e do
15:24 < Ilmen> .i ĭe ko litru surla
15:24 < selpahi> .i .a'o do te dunda lo simsa se vamji
15:25 < Ilmen> je'e .a'o
15:25 < Ilmen> co'o
15:25 < selpahi> co'o
17:52 < zipcpi> oiro'a toi'e ba'a la selpa'i mo'u jmina lo zi'ejvo la jbovlaste
18:06 < astroendjisai> coi .i lo nu jundi ro do ku terzu'e lo nu mi zvati .i mi cilre fu la'edi'u
18:29 < astroendjisai> .i ro do smaji
18:29 < astroendjisai> si tolylau
18:37 < bigcentaur> coi
18:41 < astroendjisai> .ui nai lo rirni mi na nelci barduku
18:41 < mensi> i ji'a mi na nelci mi'e la mensi
19:02 < senpi_gunka> coi
23:56 < gleki> right, NE should be autoinserted
--- Day changed Sun Jul 12 2015
01:24 < gleki> spagetufa: ro lo ma'a datka cu lalxu limna va
01:24 < spagetufa> ([FA {<ro BOI> <lo (¹NE ma'a¹) datka KU>}] [cu {<lalxu limna> <(¹va KU¹) VAU>}])
01:24 < gleki> spagetufa: ro lo ma'a je do datka cu lalxu limna va
01:24 < spagetufa> ([FA {<ro BOI> <lo (¹NE [ma'a je do]¹) datka KU>}] [cu {<lalxu limna> <(¹va KU¹) VAU>}])
01:24 < gleki> spagetufa: ro lo ma'a je ne do datka cu lalxu limna va
01:24 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,], [0123456789], [lL], [mM], [nN] or [rR] but "v" found.
01:24 < gleki> cliva: ^
01:24 < gleki> alta: lo mi je ne mi mensi cu mo
01:24 < mensi> ([FA {lo <(¹[NE {FIhA mi} GEhU] [je {ne <FIhA mi> GEhU}]¹) (¹mensi NF¹)> KU}] [cu {mo VAU}])
02:13 < gleki> Altatufa is now able to autoinsert I omitted before selbri
02:13 < gleki> alta: prami mi prami lo mi gerku
02:13 < mensi> ([{FA ZOhE} {CU <prami NF> <FE mi> VAU}] [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <prami NF> <FE (¹lo [{NE <FIhA mi> GEhU} {gerku NF}] KU¹)> VAU}])
02:27  * ctefa`o cu cilce tolcanci
02:31 < gleki> cizra fa lonu zo tolcanci cu lujvo gi'e valsi lo vajni
02:37 < ctefa`o> gives 6 c, love me some c-s
02:39 < ctefa`o> One thing - what were the reasons for words like "sincrboa" being disallowed? Because the "boa" was hard to distinguish from "boua"?
02:41 < gleki> most likely
02:41 < ctefa`o> boua/boia*
02:46 < gleki> in la alta dialect they are synonyms to {-bo'a}
02:46 < ctefa`o> Ah yes bo'a too. boa vs bo'a boia boua
02:47 < gleki> altatufa is so long now due to all these autorestorations ...
03:55 < gleki> alta: lo cidja cu noi mi djica lo ka cikta ke'a
03:55 < mensi> ([FA {lo <cidja NF> KU}] [cu {DU ZOhE <noi (¹FA mi¹) (¹CU [djica NF] [FE {lo <ka (²[FA ZOhE] [CU {cikta NF} {FE ke'a} VAU]²) KEI> KU}] VAU¹)> KUhO}])
03:56 < gleki> en: poi'i
03:56 < mensi> poi'i = [NU] x1 is such that poi'i abstraction is true; x1 binds ke'a within the abstraction.  |>>> Originally proposed
03:56 < mensi> by And Rosta around 2001. |>>> selpahi
03:56 < gleki> crap
03:57 < gleki> NU can't bind ke'a
04:03 < ctefa`o> I think poi'i/voi shouldn't be considered a NU
04:03 < ctefa`o> More like noi and poi
04:04 < ctefa`o> Same for kai'u
04:04 < gleki> kai'u is definitely in NU since it takes ce'u
04:05 < gleki> as for poi'i it's some kind of shortcut, closer to compound cmavo
04:05 < ctefa`o> ti'e it is considered to expand to a ka
04:05 < gleki> as with xu'u = lo du'u
04:05 < gleki> kai'u isn't precisely expanded into ka due to variable typing.
04:05 < ctefa`o> Well that was what I ti'ed
04:06 < gleki> e.g. {mi} isn't an abstraction, thus {ka} can't be applied to it if you apply strong typing
04:06 < gleki> but you can se {kai'u}
04:06 < ctefa`o> poi'i is definitely not a NU though
04:06 < ctefa`o> Put it in POIhI or something
04:06 < gleki> *but you can use {kai'u}
04:06 < Ilmen> poi'i is a NU. NU is a *syntactic* class
04:06 < gleki> it's NU but some kind of NU10000
04:07 < Ilmen> for semantic distinctions, a number is usually appended to the selmaho name
04:07 < gleki> because no other NU can take ke'a
04:07 < Ilmen> UI1, UI2, UI3...
04:07 < selpahi> https://www.reddit.com/r/Ithkuil/comments/3d05jj/the_locative_case_is_ambiguous/
04:07 < gleki> ke'a is a NOI thing
04:07 < ctefa`o> Well I don't think NU should be able to bind ki/ke'a
04:07 < gleki> dative is similarly ambiguous
04:07 < gleki> mentioning Russian there is just that JQ misread something somewhere
04:07 < Ilmen> je'e la selpa'i .i .ai ba tcidu .i ta'o .ai mi di'a citka co'o
04:07 < ctefa`o> but then again I have...different semantics than you
04:09 < gleki> it's a no-winner game. if you put it into NU or whether you make a new selmaho you gain nothing but a mild stisfaction that everything parses
04:09 < gleki> https://www.reddit.com/r/Ithkuil/comments/2ann3i/why_the_dative_case_for_to_have_something/
04:09 < gleki> Secondly, like some Western languages (e.g., Russian), Ithkuil uses a dative construction in lieu of any verb ‘to have’ in reference to possession or attribution. It would therefore be used in translating sentences such as
04:09 < selpahi> mi pu za tcidu
04:10 < gleki> Gleki replied: Russian doesn't use dative for possession. "There is a book to me" is meaningless in Russian.
04:10 < gleki> We say "у меня есть книга". It doesn't have any dative cases at all.
04:10 < selpahi> .i la .kixadas. cu tugni fi lo du'u su'o lo mupli pe la .dativ. cu naldra
04:11 < gleki> i ku'i na mo'u stika le se cukta
04:12 < gleki> i krinu lo nu mi pu noroi jinvi lo du'u ibu me lo bangu poi prali lo prenu fa lo nu baupli
04:13 < selpahi> ga'a do ma genrkasu do'e lo do rusko jufra
04:13 < gleki> i sa'u lo ibu cukta cu simsa lo bauske cukta ma'i mi
04:14 < gleki> selpahi: lo genrkasu zo'u na'inmo i lo sumtcita ba'e e lo genrkasu cu cupra lo te sumti stura
04:14 < gleki> i va'i zoi ry.у.ry. mutce vajni
04:14 < selpahi> ua
04:15 < gleki> у меня есть книга => ~=At I-GENITIVE exists book-NOMINATIVE
04:15 < gleki> At+Genitive => to have
04:16 < gleki> ta'osairu'e
04:16 < gleki> с книгой  = with BOOK-INSTRUMENTAL = with a book
04:16 < gleki> i ku'i
04:17 < gleki> с книги  = with BOOK-GENITIVE = from a book
04:17 < selpahi> ie mi djuno ru'e
04:17 < gleki> i lo sumtcita cu mutce vajni i lo genrkasu na roroi cupra lo te bridi stura
04:17 < selpahi> https://www.reddit.com/r/Ithkuil/comments/3d06tl/the_way_negation_works_is_either_underspecified/
04:18 < gleki> i ku'i na mtce srana la itkuiile cukta i sa'u Jy Ky bu pu tavla fi lo na drani pe lo rusko 
04:19 < gleki> selpahi: uenai
04:20 < gleki> i o'i lo nu do pante ka'e rinka lo JQ cu catra le bangu
04:21 < selpahi> xu nabmi .i la .itku'ile va'o lo nu na renvi lo tai cmalu nu pante cu na .inda
04:22 < gleki> inda lo ka mi lanli ce'u gi'e pilno lo tcila be ce'u tu'a lo jbobau
04:22 < gleki> alta: lo noi mi citka ke'a cidja
04:22 < mensi> ([FA {lo <(¹noi [{FA mi} {CU <citka NF> <FE ke'a> VAU}] KUhO¹) (¹cidja NF¹)> KU}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
04:23 < gleki> spagetufa: lo poi'i mi citka ke'a cidja
04:23 < spagetufa> ([FA {lo <(¹poi'i [{FA mi} {CU <citka (²[FE ke'a] VAU²)>}] KEI¹) cidja> KU}] VAU)
04:23 < gleki> spagetufa: lo noi mi citka ke'a cidja
04:23 < spagetufa> ([FA {lo <noi (¹[FA mi] [CU {citka <(²FE ke'a²) VAU>}]¹) KU'O> cidja KU}] VAU)
04:23 < gleki> spagetufa: lo poi'i mi citka ke'a vau cidja
04:23 < spagetufa> ([FA {lo <(¹poi'i [{FA mi} {CU <citka (²[FE ke'a] vau²)>}] KEI¹) cidja> KU}] VAU)
04:24 < gleki> spagetufa: lo poi'i mi citka ke'a vau vau cidja
04:24 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,] or end of input but "c" found.
04:25 < gleki> ma xamgu mupli lo'u lo poi'i le'u
04:25 < gleki> i sa'e ma pluka mupli
04:26 < selpahi> "mi kecti lo poi'i lo nu lo remna ta'e ckasu ke'a cu cafne"
04:27 < selpahi> "mi manci lo poi'i no da djuno lo du'u ke'a mipri balcre"
04:27 < gleki> mi kecti zo'e noi lo nu lo remna ta'e ckasu ke'a cu cafne
04:28 < gleki> i pei
04:28 < gleki> di'u
04:28 < selpahi> mi na pilno zo zo'e
04:29 < selpahi> https://www.reddit.com/r/Ithkuil/comments/3d07k4/how_to_specify_destination_another_missing_case/
04:29 < gleki> i xu no drata se pante
04:29 < selpahi> lo cutci
04:29 < selpahi> .i no drata mi se pante
04:29 < gleki> je'e je'e
04:30 < selpahi> .i ku'i ko'a ta'e poi'i ro da jinvi lo du'u ke'a sipna
04:30 < selpahi> sei mupli
04:30 < selpahi> .i krinu lo nu .ei zo poi'i cmima ma'oi NU
04:30 < gleki> mi pu kucli tu'a lo'u lo poi'i le'u
04:31 < gleki> i ie ie ma'oi nu i sa'u mi pensi tu'a y smuske nu gentufa
04:31 < gleki> *lo
04:31 < gleki> alta: mi kecti lo noi lo nu lo remna ta'e ckasu ke'a cu cafne
04:31 < mensi> ([FA mi] [CU {kecti NF} {FE <lo (¹[noi {<FA (²lo [nu {<FA (³lo [remna NF] KU³)> <CU (³ta'e [ckasu NF]³) (³FE ke'a³) VAU>} KEI] KU²)> <cu (²cafne NF²) VAU>} KUhO] COhE¹) KU>} VAU])
04:32 < gleki> no'i sa'u mi jinvi lo du'u zo noi ce zo xoi ce zo poi'i cu tcesimsa zu'ai
04:33 < gleki> i ja'o mi na nelci lo nu le gunma cu so'ijecimei
04:33 < mensi> ji'a mi mutce nelci i ie
04:33 < selpahi> zo'o ru'e krinu lo nu rimni
04:33 < gleki> rimni i ku'i ci nai mei
04:33 < gleki> vau je'u
04:34 < gleki> noi:poi::noi'i?:poi'i::?:xoi
04:34 < gleki> i xa ei mei 
04:36 < selpahi> go'i .i ku'i zo noi'i mo
04:36 < selpahi> .i na mapti lo drata
04:36 < selpahi> .i zo poi'i no'e srana zo poi
04:37 < gleki> srana zo noi xu
04:38  * gleki ba'a la xorlo bazi co'a se casnu
04:40 < selpahi> na srana
04:40 < selpahi> .i srana zo me'au je zo ckaji .i na srana zo poi ja zo noi
04:41 < gleki> xu zo lo ca'o srana lu zo'e noi li'u
04:41 < selpahi> go'i
04:41 < gleki> zo ckaji je'e
04:47 < gleki> i ba'a milxe nandu fa lo nu gentufa galfi zo poi'i zo ckaji
04:47 < Ilmen> lu ckaji lo ka ce'u goi ke'a zo'u ... li'u
04:48 < Ilmen> %)
04:48 < selpahi> satci
04:48 < selpahi> la .redit. na curmi lo nu mi benji
04:49 < gleki> benji ma
04:49 < selpahi> lo cnino se casnu
04:49 < Ilmen> .ai mi tcidu tau la bredi ditcu
05:08 < ctefa`o> Now that more people are around -- what exactly was the ban on "-boa" "-bae" "-bea" based on? The problem of distinguishing boa from boua/boia/bo'a?
05:08 < ctefa`o> Or something else as well?
05:09 < gleki> it was initially banned in Lojban. from it's beginning.
05:09 < selpahi> When Lojban was made, they decided against keeping the VV from Loglan, which is why cmavo and rafsi have V'V instead. It makes no sense to then allow them in brivla.
05:14 < ctefa`o> So they were initially only allowed in brivla and then not at all?
05:21 < selpahi> "Vowel hiatus is often not stable: it tends to turn into diphthongs.
05:21 < selpahi> Loglan, in fact, uses "ao" for the diphthong written "au" in Lojban;
05:21 < selpahi> Loglan "aa", "ae", "au", "ea", "ee", "eo", "eu", "oa", "oe", "oo", "ou"
05:21 < selpahi> are all instances of hiatus. Adding "'" not only eliminated hiatus, but
05:21 < selpahi> added lots more vowel pairs (meaning more cmavo and rafsi) to play with.
05:21 < selpahi> In addition, eliminating things like "tiu" in favor of "ti'u" reduced
05:21 < selpahi> the chance that the "t" would be palatalized into "tcu". "
05:22 < selpahi> -John Cowan
05:23 < ctefa`o> je'e .a'u ki'e
05:35 < ctefa`o> And for die/[dje] not being ok?;)
05:37 < ctefa`o> Similar reasons I suppose
05:41 < ctefa`o> Guess that easily becomes [dije]
05:45  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
05:45 < selpahi> It becomes {dje}
05:46  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
05:53 < ctefa`o> jehe
05:55 < ctefa`o> iirc some were discussing that putting a denpa-bu would improve that ".die" but I don't see how
05:58 < selpahi> I don't recall any such thing.
05:59 < selpahi> Maybe you are confusing it with {au ua} needing a glottal stop in the middle.
06:00 < ctefa`o> no it was definitely about putting denpa-bu before CiV/CuV. Maybe I dreamt it
06:01 < ctefa`o> yeah au.ua or we get "[awwa]"
06:02 < ctefa`o> ([awa] li'a)
07:07 < gleki> i can't ever imagine pronouncing {die} as {dje}. probably because i utter it dentally
07:21  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: mi finti lo lojbo selsanga pe me'e  lu claxu be do crisa li'u #lojban    https://soundcloud.com/cogas-iuk/sunday-10-38-pm?utm_source=soundcloud&utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=twitter [http://bit.ly/1M4doMZ]
07:31 < rutytar> coi
07:33 < ctefa`o> gleki: yeah that die is kinda distinct from dje
07:47 < Ilmen> What's wrong with [ʔaʊwa] for {.auŭa}?
07:49  * nuzba @s_i_d_a: はじロジ http://cogas.github.io/hajiloji/ 一通り読んで適当にロジバン作文とかしてみて、足りないところはwavelessonsの翻訳 http://misonikomilojban.blogspot.jp/search/label/lojban%20wavelessons で学習すればとりあへず僕を追ひ越す程度のレベルにはなれるかと。 [http://bit.ly/1M4f1KS]
07:58 < Ilmen> za'a la .itku'ile finti cu spuda tau la selpa'i .i za'a sutra lo ka spuda
08:07 < gleki> my leg got hit...
08:10 < gleki> mi ka lo jamfu be ce'u pu co'a se darxi
08:20 < gleki> wat's the difference between klani and gradu then
08:22 < Ilmen> .i'unai
08:32 < gleki> en: incita
08:32 < mensi> incita = x1 is an adposition linking its complement (argument) x2 with x3 |>>> x2 can sometimes be called 'noun phrase
08:32 < mensi> of adposition'. x3 can e.g. be the current clause (lo bridi), x2  of it. |>>> gleki
08:33 < gleki> what's wrong with its place structure
08:33 < gleki> if it's wrong it should be aligned to the place structure of similar words
08:33 < gleki> en: bridi
08:33 < mensi> bridi = x1 (du'u) is a predicate relationship with relation x2 among arguments (sequence/set) x3. |>>> Also: x3 are
08:33 < mensi> related by relation x2 (= terbri for reordered places).  (x3 is a set completely specified); See also sumti, fancu. |>>>
08:33 < mensi> officialdata
08:35 < gleki> incita looks like {se te bridi}
08:37 < selpahi> xu na simsa zo tcita
08:38 < gleki> en: tcita
08:38 < mensi> tcita = x1 is a label/tag of x2 showing information x3. |>>> See also sinxa, cmene, judri. |>>>
08:38 < mensi> officialdata
08:38 < gleki> xm
08:38 < gleki> na simsa
08:39 < gleki> i lo te incita so'eroi bridi
08:39 < gleki> i lo incita cu te jorne lo sumti so'eroiku lo bridi
08:40 < gleki> i ie simsa lu te jorne li'u
08:40 < gleki> i do stidi ma
08:41 < gleki> i vajni ke bauske tcila
08:41 < gleki> fa lo incita
08:46 < ctefa`o> Ilmen: I like [ʔaʊwa] too
08:51 < ctefa`o> [ɂaɪja] as well
08:54 < astroendjisai> Hi. I have a question. How would you ask a question requesting permission to do something?
08:54 < astroendjisai> Like "may I sit here?"
08:54 < gleki> e'a pei
08:54 < gleki> e'a pei mi zutse vi
08:55 < gleki> gloss: e'a pei mi zutse vi
08:55 < mensi> Permission emotion ? me sit here
08:55 < astroendjisai> Cool, thanks.
08:56 < _mukti_> I prefer to place the {vi} in front of the {zutse}, in part so I remember that it's a tense rather than an object
08:56 < _mukti_> Nice glosser, by the way :)
08:57 < gleki> no
08:57 < astroendjisai> That's nifty. Hmm.
08:57 < astroendjisai> gloss: do viska mi
08:57 < clakre> it's offline
08:57 < astroendjisai> Oh
08:57 < gleki> wait a bit
08:57 < clakre> it quit the channel less than a minute ago, it'll be back
08:57 < astroendjisai> Drat it all
08:58 < astroendjisai> Ah
08:58 < ctefa`o> coi clakre
08:58 < gleki> i have no clue what's going with the server right now
08:58 < gleki> but mensi bot doesnt want to join
08:58 < astroendjisai> Yeah.
08:58 < astroendjisai> Weird
08:58 < astroendjisai> gloss: do viska mi
08:58 < mensi> You see me
08:59 < astroendjisai> Nice
09:00 < gleki> gloss: e'a pei mi zutse vi
09:00 < mensi> [permission granted] ? me sit here
09:00 < gleki> maybe this is a bit better
09:01 < gleki> for those who haven't heard please rregister here and upvote 5 questions with rating below 10 area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
09:06 < _mukti_> exp: to'e ki'u nai bo
09:06 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
09:06 < _mukti_> ua nai
09:06 < _mukti_> .i to'e ki'u nai bo ty cu tròci lo nu clìva lo bìrka be la mùdypre kei
09:12 < _mukti_> Curious. It needs some kind of structuring cmavo to parse
09:12 < _mukti_> camxes: .i to'e ki'u nai bo
09:12 < camxes> (i [to'e ki'u nai] bo)
09:12 < _mukti_> camxes: to'e ki'u nai bo
09:12 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,], [gG], [lL], [mM], [nN], [rR] or [vV] but "b" found.
09:12 < _mukti_> camxes: ni'o to'e ki'u nai bo
09:12 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,], [gG], [lL], [mM], [nN], [rR] or [vV] but "b" found.
09:13 < _mukti_> camxes: lu to'e ki'u nai bo li'u
09:13 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [uU] or [yY] but "i" found.
09:13 < _mukti_> Or maybe a very specific cmavo.
09:13 < _mukti_> I think this may be a camxes bug
09:14 < _mukti_> Unless there's some kind of rationale for why it works with {.i} and not {ni'o}
09:14 < _mukti_> (or for that matter, why it doesn't work without either)
09:15 < Ilmen> coi
09:16 < _mukti_> coi la .ilmen.
09:16 < _mukti_> I've been working on errata for "Oz".
09:17 < _mukti_> There's a line that seems to have been mangled by search-and-replace that I'm trying to reconstruct.
09:17 < _mukti_> .i je ty. to'e ki'u nai gi lo blànu cu ba'o milxe lo ka kadbì'o gi'a'a mèlbi tàxfu
09:17 < _mukti_> Original: "and although the blue was somewhat faded with many washings, it was still a pretty frock."
09:17 < Ilmen> za'a
09:18 < _mukti_> The part about the washings seems to have been deliberately omitted.
09:18 < _mukti_> (Unless the search and replace swallowed even more text)
09:19 < Ilmen> .a'a pei doi la selpa'i
09:19 < _mukti_> I'm tempted to reconstruct it without the gihek
09:20 < _mukti_> .i je ty to'e ki'u nai lo nu lo blanu cu ba'o milxe lo ka kadbi'o cu melbi taxfu
09:20 < _mukti_> (or {cu ja'a melbi taxfu})
09:21 < Ilmen> mapti simlu
09:22 < _mukti_> exp: ge nai lo ka stedu noi dy pu viska tu'a ke'a gi lo ka kukte ninmu
09:22 < mensi> ([{ge nai} {lo <(¹ka [CU {stedu VAU}] KEI¹) (¹noi [{dy BOI} {CU <pu viska> <tu'a ke'a LUhU> VAU}] KUhO¹)> KU} gi {lo <ka (¹CU [kukte ninmu] VAU¹) KEI> KU}] VAU)
09:22 < _mukti_> exp: ge nai lo ka stedu noi dy pu viska tu'a ke'a gi ja'ai lo ka kukte ninmu
09:22 < mensi> ([{ge nai} {lo <(¹ka [CU {stedu VAU}] KEI¹) (¹noi [{dy BOI} {CU <pu viska> <tu'a ke'a LUhU> VAU}] KUhO¹)> KU} {gi ja'ai} {lo <ka (¹CU [kukte ninmu] VAU¹) KEI> KU}] VAU)
09:23 < Ilmen> za'a sumti gi'enai mulno jufra
09:25 < _mukti_> ie na mulno jufra
09:25 < _mukti_>  la .dòrotis. cu se spàji lo nu la bànli te màkfa cu ckàji ...
09:39 < gleki> since when {to'eki'unaibo} should parse?
09:39 < gleki> fragments are even dying
09:39 < gleki> alta: i to'e ki'u nai bo
09:39 < mensi> (i [{to'e <ki'u nai>} bo] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
09:40 < gleki> should i allow autoinserting I? i think not
09:40 < gleki> even {prami mi prami lo mi gerku} is a super rare example
09:44 < _mukti_> It seems to me that just about anything that follows {.i} should also parse without the {.i}
09:44 < _mukti_> And that just about anything that parses after {.i} should also work after {ni'o}
09:45 < _mukti_> But maybe there are reasons that I'm not aware of that would preclude this
09:45 < gleki> if you mean making i elidable then it makes sense only at the very beginning of the text
09:45 < _mukti_> Yes, that's what I'm talking about
09:45 < gleki> because making {i} elidable in the middle makes sense in a very minor nummber of examples
09:45 < _mukti_> camxes: .i to'e ki'u nai bo mi broda
09:45 < camxes> (i [{to'e ki'u nai} bo] [mi CU] [broda VAU])
09:45 < _mukti_> camxes: to'e ki'u nai bo mi broda
09:45 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
09:46 < _mukti_> camxes: ni'o to'e ki'u nai bo mi broda
09:46 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
09:46 < Ilmen> camxes: ni'o je broda
09:46 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
09:46 < _mukti_> So, the issue of fragments is a separate one.
09:46 < Ilmen> Yet {ni'o je} appears a fair amount of times in la Oz
09:46 < Ilmen> ba'anai
09:47 < _mukti_> Hmm, I'm not finding that
09:47 < _mukti_> {ni'o je'u} and {ni'o jetnu}, however
09:47 < Ilmen> Maybe I'm misremembering
09:47 < gleki> alta: mi prami
09:47 < mensi> (I [FA mi] [CU {prami NF} VAU])
09:47 < gleki> as you wish
09:48 < gleki> alta: ki'unai bo mi mo
09:48 < _mukti_> {ni'o to'e ki'u nai}, however does appear
09:48 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
09:48 < gleki> ^ wont parse since {bo} is about the previous clause which can't appear in the beginning of the text
09:53 < _mukti_> I see a discussion in 2006
09:53 < gleki> alta: ni'o je bo mi mo
09:54 < mensi> (ni'o je bo [FA mi] [CU {mo VAU}])
09:54 < gleki> fixed
09:54 < gleki> text_1 = expr:(I_clause (jek / joik)? (stag? BO_clause)? free* paragraphs / NIhO_clause+ (jek / joik)? (stag? BO_clause)? free* su_clause* paragraphs? / I_clause_elidible paragraphs) {return _node("text_1", expr);}
09:54 < selpahi> I already told you gi'a'a is {gi ja'a}. But the washing part seems to be missing.
09:55 < _mukti_> selpahi: Yes, I included {ja'a} but the sentence still needed more help
09:55 < selpahi> Why?
09:55 < _mukti_> to'e ki'u nai gi lo blànu cu ba'o milxe lo ka kadbì'o gi'a'a mèlbi tàxfu
09:56 < gleki> spagetufa: to'e ki'u nai gi lo blànu cu ba'o milxe lo ka kadbì'o gi ja'a melbi taxfu
09:56 < spagetufa> (CU [{<to'e (¹ki'u nai¹)> gi} {<FA (¹lo blanu KU¹)> <cu (¹[ba'o milxe] [{FE <lo (²ka [CU {kad/bi'o VAU}] KEI²) KU>} VAU]¹)>} gi {CU <(¹ja'a [melbi taxfu]¹) VAU>} VAU])
09:56 < _mukti_> What to do with the first {gi} ?
09:56 < gleki> ma nabmi vau uanai
09:56 < selpahi> BAI gi ... gi
09:56 < selpahi> {to'e ki'u nai} is BAI
09:57 < _mukti_> I'm not familar with BAI gi ... looking now
09:57 < _mukti_> CLL 23 ua
09:58 < _mukti_> Cool
09:58 < selpahi> Man I'm not sure what to make of JQ's responses.
09:58 < _mukti_> Where?
09:59 < selpahi> On reddit. I've been posting a few problems I've found with Ithkuil
09:59 < selpahi> (ithkuil reddit)
09:59 < gleki> xe'e
09:59 < gleki> i ibu larcu bangu
10:00 < gleki> i xu do djica lo nu co'a prane ja logji bangu
10:00 < selpahi> djica lo nu ka'e cusku lo se skudji
10:00 < gleki> i ma'a pinfu lo rarna bangu i ibu ji'a jai bapli lo nu ma'a na kakne tu'a da
10:02 < gleki> im slowly getting rid of fragments in alta
10:03 < gleki> fragment = expr:(!term !tag quantifier / links / linkargs) {return _node("fragment", expr);}
10:03 < gleki> only 3 cases need to be reimplemented za'adai
10:04 < _mukti_> I think fragments are useful.
10:04 < cliva> exp: mo'e ti mo'e ta roi
10:04 < mensi> ([{<(¹mo'e ti TEhU¹) (¹mo'e ta TEhU¹)> roi} KU] VAU)
10:04 < cliva> ^ ma jai va'o pilno sei malgli
10:05 < _mukti_> Which is to say, I don't see the value in making fragmentary utterances unparseable.
10:05 < gleki> cliva: this happened this-some times
10:05 < gleki> _mukti_: they are parseable
10:05 < gleki> alta: je
10:05 < mensi> (I [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}] [je {CU <COhE VAU>} VAU])
10:06 < gleki> the question is not in this syntactic parsing
10:06 < _mukti_> Oh. Curious!
10:06 < gleki> exp: je
10:06 < mensi> je
10:06 < gleki> which is better? na'i
10:07 < _mukti_> I see. You're accepting them, but interpreting them in an implicit context. Neat.
10:07 < gleki> the question is what is COhE
10:07 < cliva> gleki: ro lo re zo mo'e zei co'e cu pagbu lo mekso poi pagbu lo roi zei klauza
10:07 < gleki> xu naku lo klauza cu du lo bridi
10:07 < cliva> me PEG jargone
10:08 < gleki> i ua
10:08 < _mukti_> Does the implicit "FA ZOhE" mean that co'e is 1-ary?
10:08 < cliva> sa'e nai
10:08 < gleki> _mukti_: lojban grammar says that selbri is >=1-ary
10:09 < selpahi> (Toaq Dzu has nullary predicates)
10:09 < _mukti_> Where's that? I'm not surprised, but curious.
10:12 < gleki> for a moment i becae angry at such a weird application like mahantufa only a second later realizing that it was written by me
10:12 < gleki> *became
10:12 < ctefa`o> "nullary predicate"?
10:12 < ctefa`o> MO
10:13 < _mukti_> I see there's a jbovlaste feature request to support nullary predicates.
10:14 < _mukti_> So I'm wondering if there is a rationale for why there aren't or can't be. Or if it's just an arbitary limitation in mu'a jbovlaste
10:14 < gleki> if there are then what is {lo broda}
10:15 < gleki> and what is bridi head then
10:16 < gleki> but for guaspi it's obvious that 0-ary predicates can exist
10:17 < _mukti_> Supposing that {broda} were nullary, I don't think {lo broda} would have any defined sense. It would be like {lo se blanu}, no ?
10:17 < _mukti_> Or {lo zi'o crino} to use an example from the wiki
10:17 < gleki> {zo'e noi fa ke'a broda}
10:18 < gleki> that's not the proof of course. the proof is that bridi head must exist.
10:19 < gleki> if it exists then ke'a goes to x1
10:20 < _mukti_> Right, so I follow you in saying that {lo broda} wouldn't be valid for nullary {broda}. But I could imagine it working for non-sumti.
10:21 < gleki> if you change PEG and CLL then sure :)
10:21 < gleki> currently it's against them
10:21 < _mukti_> Hmm. I'm not sure this question touches the formal grammar. And as for CLL, I believe you if you are saying that the CLL says that. I just want to see the details.
10:22 < _mukti_> Maybe there's a good reason to disallow nullaries. I'd just like to know what it is. Or alternately, if nullaries are prohibited without a rationale, I'd like to know about that, too.
10:23 < gleki> someone create a repo on github called "Questions to jbocre" and open this issue there
10:23 < gleki> :)
10:26 < ctefa`o> camxes: su zei si
10:26 < camxes> ([{su <zei si>}] VAU)
10:28 < gleki> The general rule, then, is that the selbri may occur anywhere in the bridi as long as the sumti maintain their order. The only exception (and it is an important one) is that if the selbri appears first, the x1 sumti is taken to have been omitted:
10:28 < gleki> [ http://lojban.github.io/cll/9/2/index.html ]
10:28 < gleki> _mukti_: ^
10:29 < gleki> this "exception" works the same for {LE selbri KU}
10:29 < gleki> where x1 is "omitted"
10:29 < _mukti_> That seems to me more like a description of how word order works than a constraint requiring a sumti.
10:30 < gleki> so you can define nullary predicates, it's just that you can never use them in Lojban
10:30 < _mukti_> I see how it could be read that way, but that's not the way I perceive the intent.
10:31 < gleki> well, then instead of one rule you begi treating LE+selbri and bare selbri differently
10:31 < _mukti_> How so?
10:32 < gleki> 10:20 < _mukti_> Right, so I follow you in saying that {lo broda} wouldn't be valid for nullary {broda}. But I could imagine it working for non-sumti.
10:32 < selpahi> The reason why it works in Toaq Dzu is that there is no {zo'e}, and unfilled places are "not there" (i.e., they are in a sense {zi'o}'d out), so a nullary predicate can happily stand on its own.
10:32 < _mukti_> Say we have a 2-ary predicate, {broda}. In the statement {.i broda}, we assume that there are two magic {zo'e} that are implicitly available.
10:33 < gleki> _mukti_: the grammar knows nothing about x2 here.
10:33 < _mukti_> If {brode} is 1-ary, then {.i brode} supplies only one
10:33 < gleki> only semantics knows
10:33 < _mukti_> And in the case of {.i nilbrode} ?
10:33 < _mukti_> s/nilbrode/zilbrode/
10:33 < fenki> _mukti_ meant to say: And in the case of {.i zilbrode} ?
10:33 < gleki> in {i zilbrode} at least x1 exists
10:34 < gleki> e.g. {i zilblanu} which means someone is gonna change the dictionary :)
10:34 < _mukti_> selpahi: Yeah, I get that {zo'e} is a mess, and I've followed, with some befuddlement, the attempts to correct it with {zi'o}
10:35 < selpahi> Toaq Dzu predicates are more akin to prolog's, where a different arity means a different predicate, although the differences tend to be smaller than in prolog.
10:35 < _mukti_> .a'u
10:36 < _mukti_> That's a familiar concept to anyone who uses a programming language with method "overloading".
10:38 < gleki> curtis suggested something similar recently. depending on how you fill a sumti you change arity of "this predicate"
10:38 < _mukti_> I guess what I'm saying is I don't see the implicit x1 that is supplied in the passage that gleki quoted as having anything to do with a lower bounds on the number of sumti that a selbri may take. It assumes selbri take at least 1 sumti because they are all defined that way. But we're also given {zi'o} which let's us get to a place where that assumption is not valid.
10:39 < gleki> well, {i zi'o broda} is {i fa zi'o broda}, yes. semantically you get 0-ary predicate
10:39 < _mukti_> The way I read it is "if the selbri appears first, the x1 sumti is taken to have been omitted" ... if the selbri takes such a sumti.
10:40 < _mukti_> Already we have the case where a magic number of {zo'e}s is provided based on the arity of the predicate. If the arity is zero, that's not a special case. No {zo'e} is provided.
10:41 < gleki> "... if the selbri takes such a sumti" <-- where is that said?
10:41 < _mukti_> That's my text, placed outside the quote to mark it as such.
10:42 < gleki> i can only repeat that i see the same rule for sumti
10:44 < _mukti_> I see a necessary restriction for descriptive sumti, in the sense that the way they are defined, they require a place for {ke'a}
10:45 < _mukti_> I don't see that restriction having anything to do with the predicates themselves
10:45 < gleki> i only see one rule, that's it. one rule is easier to remember for newcomers
10:46 < gleki> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bpfk-list/EV1avCV8_PY
10:50 < _mukti_> There's only one rule that I'm describing: descriptive sumti require a predicate with at least one argument
10:51 < _mukti_> As opposed to what you are describing: All sebri require at least one argument
10:51 < gleki> no, you have two rules
10:51 < gleki> the second rule is about bare bridi
10:51 < _mukti_> (Which incidentally requires a corollary to explain what happens when {zi'o} erases a predicate's last argument)
10:52 < gleki> which would mean that bare bridi and bridi converted to sumti behave differently
10:52 < _mukti_> Explain to me how they behave differently?
10:53 < gleki> you say that in sumti x1 must exist, in bare selbridi they may not
10:53 < gleki> two rules
10:54 < _mukti_> I'm saying that the definition of sumti requires that they exist, and that's not a separate rule. That's part of the definition of descriptive sumti.
10:54 < _mukti_> No separate rule is then required for selbri.
10:55 < gleki> compare {broda ko'e ko'i} and {lo broda be ko'e bei ko'i}
10:55 < _mukti_> Ok... go on ...
10:55 < gleki> the same rule is used for both of them if x1 is assumed to always exist.
10:56 < _mukti_> How is it different without that assumption.
10:56 < _mukti_> ?
10:56 < gleki> the rule in short is "bridi head can't be empty, it's prefilled with at least {fa zo'e}."
10:56 < _mukti_> I think you're innovating.
10:56 < gleki> rephrasing since CLL explanations arent convincing you
10:57 < _mukti_> I don't see a reason why the bridi head can't be empty. Either logically, or in tradition.
10:57 < gleki> i have only two points mentioned above
10:57 < _mukti_> I think you are reading a restriction into the CLL which is not necessary.
10:57 < selpahi> tersmus: broda fa mi gi'e brode fa do
10:57 < tersmus> (broda(mi) /\ brode(do))
10:58 < gleki> im just perceving two parts of CLL as one rule. this allows LE-sumti and selbri be perceived equally.
10:58 < selpahi> No shared head^
10:58 < gleki> selpahi: srana ma
10:58 < selpahi> lo bridi stedu
10:58 < gleki> pe'i na srana lo pu zi nu casnu
10:58 < selpahi> je'e
10:59 < gleki> i ni'i ma pa da poi stedu cu se ponse re de
10:59 < gleki> i re stedu vau i'a
10:59 < gleki> en: uilkinse
10:59 < mensi> uilkinse = x1 is semantically regularized in x2 (property of x1) |>>> Can be applied to languages, linguistic constructs.
10:59 < mensi>  See also kalsa, gansu, smuni, prane |>>> gleki
11:00 < gleki> di'u ta'osai
11:00 < gleki> i oise'i
11:00 < gleki> i zo ganzu li'a
11:00 < _mukti_> That's interesting. So how would {broda fa mi} be conciled with the doctrine of "no empty head" ?
11:01 < gleki> 10:46 < gleki> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/bpfk-list/EV1avCV8_PY
11:01 < _mukti_> Ah. So you want to hoist FA-sumti into the head.
11:01 < gleki> which is again confirmed by {be fa} usage in another part of CLL.
11:02 < gleki> ofc. you may rewrite CLL applying these new rules, just dont forget of domino effect. otherwise you'll increase the number of onsconsistencies in CLL
11:02 < _mukti_> (or maybe just fa-sumti)
11:03 < _mukti_> Definitely not interested in unilaterally rewriting anything. But I do challenge whether the interpretation you suppose in this case is necessary and useful.
11:06 < _mukti_> And now I think I understand the point with the tersmus parse. Martin apparently does not subscribe to the interpretation that a fa-term is hoisted into the head. Because if he did, then the {fa mi} in the first bridi tail would be forced into the x1 position for the second bridi tail.
11:06 < gleki> i think you want to inject semantics into the grammar. if we were in ##English channel i wouldn't say anything but i thought the main advantage of Lojban was separating syntax and grammar in a speakable language
11:07 < gleki> _mukti_: no, i agree with Martin's parse
11:07 < gleki> because FAMs and ZAMs are different things
11:07 < _mukti_> Well, that is clear. But you see how it's relevant now?
11:08 < gleki> no, i dont see this example relevant
11:08 < _mukti_> I don't think this is about semantics. If there is a prohibition on 0-ary predicates, that's a syntactic concern. Or am I high?
11:08 < gleki> i meant that one needs to look into the dictionary to see if x1 can be filled with {zo'e}
11:09 < _mukti_> How is that different from needing the dictionary to see if x2 can be filled with it?
11:09 < gleki> grammar doesnt know anything about x2, it's not its concern
11:10 < gleki> it only says that infinite number of xN is possible
11:10 < _mukti_> In {lo broda be koa} both x1 and x2 are invoked
11:10 < _mukti_> s/koa/ko'a/
11:10 < fenki> _mukti_ meant to say: In {lo broda be ko'a} both x1 and x2 are invoked
11:11 < gleki> no'i if you want to know how i parse selpa'is example. {fa zo'e cu broda fa mi gi'e brode fa do} = {fa zo'e broda gi'e brode i mi broda i do brode}
11:11 < gleki> _mukti_: in {lo broda be ko'a} x2 is explicitely filled according to sequential filling of places.
11:11 < _mukti_> Ok, but I think you're introducing arbitrary restrictions in the service of building a parser. And I think parser building is a worthwhile pursuit, as you know. But the tail should not wag the dog.
11:12 < _mukti_> Right, and the sequential first argument is used in the definition of the description.
11:12 < gleki> it's the nature of lojban. you use {lo broda}, you prefill broda1
11:13 < _mukti_> {zo'e noi ke'a broda} ... no controversy there
11:15 < rutytar> sorry to interrupt, but does anyone feel like proofreading a translation i did?
11:15 < gleki> yes, i think you want 0-ary predicates in the dictionary. but im not against that. then x1 will be always =zi'o.
11:15 < gleki> rutytar: go on
11:16 < gleki> _mukti_: i think x1 will have a special variable type: zi'o. that's how it can be reconciled with the rest of the language
11:17 < _mukti_> .u'i and here I was thinking it was you who submitted the feature request to add nullary predicates to jbovlaste
11:17 < _mukti_> https://github.com/lojban/jbovlaste/issues/126
11:17 < _mukti_> rutytar: I'd like to see your translation
11:18 < rutytar> http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=R1h9U17e
11:18 < Ilmen> I guess that zo'e are injected only when the bridi is complete and that some sumti slot haven't been filled
11:19 < Ilmen> So that in the case of {citka gi'e klama} the zo'e isn't necessarily shared
11:20 < Ilmen> actually I wonder how ambiguous is this. In the case of gihek, are ellipsis slot always not-shared by default?
11:21 < Ilmen> If it's left to context whether they're shared or not, it would be a logical ambiguity
11:21 < _mukti_> rutytar: I think I understand. You may want {ja'e lo nu} each time {ja'e} appears
11:22 < _mukti_> or maybe just the first time
11:22 < _mukti_> No, the second, too.
11:22 < Ilmen> tersmus: citka gi'e klama
11:22 < tersmus> (citka( ) /\ klama( ))
11:23 < gleki> i think in {mo gi'e mo} the head is shared syntactically. but i dont care whether they are shared semantically
11:23 < rutytar> oh yeah
11:23 < _mukti_> rutytar: I always do that!
11:23 < rutytar> is there any other good way to say "because"?
11:24 < _mukti_> {ki'u lo nu} is my go to phrase ... but there are many shades, many ways
11:24 < _mukti_> {ki'u lo nu} ... and the reason is this (event)
11:24 < gleki> ja'e seems to be the most generic (except ni'i which is a separate case)
11:24 < gleki> {i ki'u bo} is another option. it has the same number of syllables if that matters
11:25 < gleki> btw, was it meant to be {ja'e} or {se ja'e}?
11:25 < rutytar> does ja'e have place structure?
11:26 < selpahi> This is the version I had: http://pastebin.com/NkkEBx40
11:26 < Ilmen> Having the gihek-head empty by default (as long as there is no explicit sumti there) enables {sipna gi'e jmive} to be {sipna fa zo'e gi'e jmive fa zo'e}, where context may tell that both zo'e refer to the same thing, or the converse way.
11:26 < rutytar> interesting
11:26 < gleki> what if zo'e=anything
11:26 < gleki> rutytar: if you needed "because" it's {se ja'e}
11:27 < rutytar> doesn't xa'o imply that something started too early?
11:27 < selpahi> Not in the sense that "too early" is a bad thing
11:27 < ctefa`o> doi gleki
11:27 < selpahi> Just before some expected or otherwise relevant point
11:28 < gleki> ctefa`o: mi xu
11:28 < ctefa`o> gleki: "lajiar", is that troublesome for you to say?
11:28 < gleki> ctefa`o: depending on how to utter that
11:28 < rutytar> but i guess it's "already" in the sense of "anyways"
11:28 < ctefa`o> or "lavuar"
11:28 < ctefa`o> Well like jbo
11:29 < ctefa`o> {lajiar} with i=[j]
11:29 < gleki> as "lah-zhyah-r"? no, that's easy. {lah-v-wah-r} is more difficult
11:29 < selpahi> You could replace xa'o with {va'o ro da} "in any case"
11:29 < selpahi> "no matter what"
11:30 < gleki> mi de'a jundi
11:30 < rutytar> ah, "ri" is what i was trying to use "jy" for
11:30 < ctefa`o> i am on phone and it takes eternity to put ipa signs together
11:31 < selpahi> And to imagine that Amnadya had to type Ithkuil on a phone.
11:31 < Ilmen> I find none of [laʒjar] and [lavwar] difficult to utter
11:32 < ctefa`o> Interesting I have a bit of trouble with it
11:32 < rutytar> selpahi: where is the kei on line 2? is it just nested?
11:32 < Ilmen> In French, the word for "to see" is pronounced /vwar/
11:33 < ctefa`o> How hard is it to distinguish from /var/ and /war/ for you?
11:34 < ctefa`o> to distinguish /vwar/*
11:34 < Ilmen> [var] from [vwar]?
11:35 < _mukti_> exp: ba za lo cacra be li cu'o mi broda
11:35 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
11:35 < _mukti_> exp: ba za lo cacra be li su'o mi broda
11:35 < mensi> ([{<ba za> <lo (¹cacra [be {li <su'o BOI> LOhO} BEhO]¹) KU>} mi] [CU {broda VAU}])
11:36 < selpahi> rutytar: The kei is elided, it's before the {na}
11:36 < Ilmen> Well I find them easy to distinguish, but indeed that highly depends on one's linguistic background. I'm sure I'd have a hard time distinguishing sound pairs that are easy to distinguish for people with another linguistic background than mine.
11:36 < Ilmen> @ ctefaho
11:36 < _mukti_> That seems like an uncontroversial rule to merge into camxes.
11:37 < _mukti_> (ba za lo broda) instead of (ba za) (lo broda), I mean
11:37 < selpahi> Ithkuil has h vs hh, that's difficult for me.
11:37 < rutytar> gleki: how is the place structure of ja'e determined? from the gismu it's derived from?
11:37 < selpahi> {ja'e} is a preposition.
11:38 < rutytar> but why is it a preposition for what causes rather than what is caused?
11:38 < selpahi> {ja'e X} means "resulting in X"
11:38 < ctefa`o> Ilmen: /vwar/ from /var/ and /war/
11:39 < _mukti_> {jalge} is a result
11:39 < selpahi> Because {jalge}'s x1 is a result.
11:39 < Ilmen> {ja'e} is a oddball, it has it's meaning reversed as compared with other causals (ki'u/ni'i/ri'a/mu'i...)
11:40 < Ilmen> You can use {seja'e} for tagging the cause instead of the consequence
11:40 < Ilmen> (se + ja'e)
11:40 < rutytar> if {ja'e X} means "resulting in X", wouldn't {xunre ja'o lo blanu} be "blue because red"?
11:40 < rutytar> "red results in blue"
11:41 < Ilmen> ctefa'o: I can pronounce and distinguish all the three easily
11:41 < ctefa`o> Ilmen: good
11:41 < selpahi> "it being red results in a blue event"
11:41 < selpahi> Me too
11:42 < rutytar> do i don't want {se ja'e}
11:42 < rutytar> maybe gleki was misinterpreting my intended meaning
11:42 < selpahi> You can use {ki'u X} for "because X"
11:43 < selpahi> If the {se} confuses you with {ja'e}.
11:43 < rutytar> it's supposed to be {because of X, there is Y}, so i used {X ja'e Y}
11:43 < _mukti_> What's the original text?
11:43 < rutytar> isn't that correct?
11:43 < rutytar> _mukti_: http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Litany_of_Gendlin
11:44 < selpahi> {ki'u X, Y}
11:44 < _mukti_> Would I be wrongheaded in considering {ni'i} for this?
11:45 < selpahi> No.
11:45 < _mukti_> Since these are "reasons" in the sense of what persuades or justifies, but logically inexorable effects...
11:45 < rutytar> well there aren't any axioms, so i don't think it's a logical conclusion
11:45 < rutytar> something like "the care wouldn't start because it's out of gas" isn't a logical statement
11:46 < rutytar> but it isn't a persuasion or justification either
11:47 < _mukti_> I fumble around with the causals, and usually default to {ki'u} (though {ja'e} would be a much more prudent default)
11:51 < rutytar> how would i say "ri ka'e se rinka" without the se? where would the ka'e go?
11:52 < rutytar> could i say "rinka ri ka'e"?
11:52 < selpahi> ka'e rinka ri
11:53 < selpahi> You *can* say {rinka ri ka'e}, but I don't recommend it unless you're writing a poem or are being colloquial.
11:53 < selpahi> The thing is that if you follow it up with another sumti, then it gets swallowed by {ka'e}, which is also a preposition
11:53 < rutytar> i see
11:54 < rutytar> well i am sort of writing a poem, but ka'e rinka ri actually fits better
11:54 < selpahi> If you need the {ri} to come first (hypothetically) then  {fe ri ka'e rinka} is an option that doesn't involve {se}
11:55 < _mukti_> {selri'a} is another option
11:55 < selpahi> (this happens to be extremely rarely done in practice, don't ask me why)
11:56 < rutytar> for this specific project i don't want to use any lujvo
11:56 < _mukti_> je'e
11:56 < rutytar> or rafsi, rather
11:58 < rutytar> rafsi is an interesting component of the language, it reminds me of japanese where children's books have katakana written above the kanji
11:58 < rutytar> there's an advanced and simple version of the alphabet
11:58 < _mukti_> furigana
11:58 < rutytar> ah cool
11:59 < _mukti_> That's a neat parallel. I like it.
11:59 < selpahi> Lujvo are not always just a collapsed version of two gismu. Lujvo (and zi'evla) are needed to make novel concepts that gismu alone can't give us.
11:59 < rutytar> because of that, it seems to me that a feature of gismu should be lack of specificity
12:00 < selpahi> Avoiding lujvo entirely means giving up meaning.
12:02 < selpahi> Lujvo are sometimes advertized as "advanced" brivla, because they are made up of other gismu, and making them is "better left to experienced users", so beginners are scared for no reason.
12:02 < selpahi> There is no difference between looking up a lujvo and looking up a gismu. Or looking up an English word and using a lujvo or a gismu you find.
12:03 < _mukti_> I think part of the difficulty with lujvo is not having a reliable list of the most frequent and accepted ones.
12:03 < selpahi> You don't need to know about their components.
12:03 < rutytar> i thought that was mainly because there isn't enough room to make rafsi for every gismu, and they didn't want people going around using them up
12:03 < _mukti_> Part of the difficulty regarding beginners, I mean.
12:03 < rutytar> part of the problem with analyzing lojban usage is that most of lojban speech is people talking about lojban
12:04 < _mukti_> Part of the failure of the infamous Dictionary project is that Lojbanistan has never canonized lujvo.
12:04 < clakre> I thought part of the reason not to have beginners make lujvo was the slinku'i problem
12:04 < clakre> or does that only occur with zi'evla?
12:05 < selpahi> Some people are strongly anti-lujvo (e.g. gleki), some are strongly anti-non-jvajvo, and some don't care at all. There is little unity.
12:05 < _mukti_> rutytar: On the other hand, we usually do that in English.
12:05 < selpahi> Making lujvo is different from using already existing ones
12:05 < selpahi> A beginner can do the latter.
12:06 < clakre> right, but you said above that lujvo were advertized as "advanced" and added that _making_ them was "better left to experienced users", which I think is true
12:06 < rutytar> http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=Q0gRdv3k any problems with this one?
12:06 < clakre> if peolpe are interpreting that is _using_ them being advanced, that's unfortunate
12:06 < selpahi> I myself am not the biggest fan of lujvo, but only because I dislike the random rafsi. I like my free form lujvo just fine, and treat them like any old zi'evla or gismu.
12:06 < _mukti_> Also as a beginner, I know I was spooked -- and still am somewhat discomfited -- by the jvajvo/non-jvajvo split. Not knowing how much meaning I can infer from rafsi when encountering an unknown lujvo.
12:06 < selpahi> Right, clakre.
12:07 < selpahi> rutytar: You need {lo} before {nu}
12:07 < selpahi> {nu broda kei} is a selbri
12:08 < selpahi> {lifri} -> {se lifri}
12:08 < selpahi> And {ja'e} in the last line needs to be {ki'u}/{ni'i}/{se ja'e}. Also the scope is wrong, but it's too advanced I'm afraid
12:08 < rutytar> okay. cool
12:09 < selpahi> That's why I use {.i ni'i bo}
12:09 < selpahi> used *
12:09 < rutytar> oh! i get the ja'e thing now
12:10 < rutytar> could you give me a synopsis of the scope thing? or a link?
12:10 < selpahi> 'fraid not.
12:10 < selpahi> (about the link)
12:11 < selpahi> {ka'e stali ja'e lo nu renvi} has {ka'e} have scope over {ja'e}, so it means "staying with the result of surviving is possible"
12:11 < selpahi> Or better with the correct version with ni'i:
12:12 < selpahi> {ka'e stali ni'i lo nu renvi} means "staying because your already surviving is possible"
12:12 < selpahi> While {ni'i lo nu renvi cu ka'e stali} means "Because you're already surviving, you can stay"
12:12 < selpahi> (also stali lo jetnu is malgli for "stand the truth")
12:13 < ctefa`o> stali bu'u lo jetnu sa
12:13 < _mukti_> There seems to be a convention (unwritten? buried in some mailing list thread?) whereby the presence of certain rafsi (inversion, negation, -gau, etc) marks a jvajvo. But there may well be exceptions.
12:13 < _mukti_> Is that formalized somewhere?
12:13 < rutytar> why is stali malgli but not rivbi?
12:14 < selpahi> stali means to stay.
12:14 < rutytar> but doesn't rivbi mean to avoid?
12:14 < selpahi> Yes
12:14 < rutytar> aren't they the same level of metaphor?
12:14 < rutytar> truth isn't an event or an object
12:15 < selpahi> The point is that {stali} does not mean what English "stand something" means
12:15 < rutytar> x1 abides with x2
12:16 < selpahi> mi stali lo zdani - I stayed home.
12:16 < selpahi> This has nothing to do with "I can't stand loud music"
12:17 < rutytar> which is the meaning: to not escape, to be present alongside
12:17 < rutytar> if the definition were "x1 remains at x2" i would agree, but it's "x1 remains with x2"
12:18 < _mukti_> I read "stand" in the original as meaning "bear"... closer to {bevri} than {stali} in metaphor
12:18 < rutytar> the seem to me to imply that it's passive, that it's a matter of not avoiding rather than searching
12:19 < rutytar> i'm unconvinced :p
12:21 < selpahi> I think the gimste definition means "stay at place x2". Personally I use {stali} as "x1 keeps doing/being x2 (ka)", and {zvasta} for "x1 stays at place x2"
12:22 < rutytar> so wouldn't "x1 keeps doing/being the truth" be accurate?
12:22 < _mukti_> sanli2 might be worth considering...
12:22 < _mukti_> The idea of the truth as what you're standing upon. Though it departs from the original.
12:23 < _mukti_> So, yeah, forget that.
12:23 < rutytar> i thought it was more like the weight you're holding up
12:25 < rutytar> or being uncomfortable with something happening
12:25 < rutytar> which again, i think abide is perfect for "can stand"
12:26 < ctefa`o> Is it documented anywhere but the CLL as to why some valid consonant clusters are allowed as initials while others are not?
12:26 < _mukti_> I see the important contrast in those last two lines between {ka'e} and {ca'a}
12:27 < _mukti_> stand and endure seem to be used synonymously with that contrast
12:27 < selpahi> ie
12:27 < rutytar> i don't think so. it's an example of english being tangley
12:28 < _mukti_> ctefa'o: There's a formal PEG morphology. Or you're looking for the rationale?
12:28 < rutytar> for the sake of poetry.. they bring up different ideas
12:28 < rutytar> which is part of why i like stali, because we use renvi later on
12:29 < rutytar> {.i ki'u lo prenu ka'e stali lo jetnu kei lo nu ca'o renvi ri} does this have scope issues?
12:29 < ctefa`o> yes the rationalr
12:29 < ctefa`o> Why skari and not ksari
12:29 < rutytar> the scope issue is with ka'e keeping going after the kei, right?
12:30 < selpahi> That sentence is all jumbled up
12:30 < _mukti_> The details have been debated a lot on the mailing lists, and in the old BPFK bulletin board, etc. But I don't think it's been set down in a coherent piece. So many projects!
12:31 < selpahi> lo prenu ka'e stali lo jetnu kei ki'u lo nu ca'o renvi ri
12:31 < selpahi> This is grammatically correct, but has the wrong meaning
12:31 < selpahi> {ki'u lo prenu} means "because of people"
12:31 < rutytar> doesn't kei end ki'u?
12:32 < selpahi> No. {kei} ends {nu}, but there is no {nu}
12:32 < selpahi> You need {ki'u lo nu .... kei} if you want to put an event after {ki'u}
12:33 < rutytar> oh. i see
12:33 < rutytar> so ki'u is essentially just backwards ja'e?
12:34 < selpahi> Sort of, ignoring the differences between {krinu} and {jalge}
12:37 < rutytar> mi xebni lo bakri i ki'u bo ri punji lo purmo lo xance — I hate chalk. It leaves powder on hands.
12:37 < rutytar> does that mean i could just say {lo prenu ka'e stali lo jetnu .i ki'u lo nu ca'o renvi ri}?
12:38 < selpahi> {.i ki'u bo lo go'i ca'o renvi ra}
12:40 < rutytar> could i do it without go'i?
12:40 < selpahi> {.i ki'u bo ra ca'o renvi ri}
12:41 < rutytar> oh right, i have to call lo prenu and lo jetnu
12:42 < _mukti_> i je dy pu rànda ca lo fànmo gi'e fàrlu lo lòldi vi lo cmàlu ki lo kòrbi be lo makpàpi fòldi
12:42 < _mukti_> Is this sticky {ki} ?
12:42 < selpahi> No.
12:42 < rutytar> http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=qrLMV8iQ
12:42 < selpahi> It's frame of reference {ki}
12:42 < selpahi> I don't use sticky {ki}
12:43 < selpahi> {ki lo korbi} sets the point of reference for the tenses, here {vi}.
12:43 < _mukti_> Yes, I was surprised
12:43 < rutytar> is that one good?
12:43 < selpahi> A small distance from the edge
12:43 < _mukti_> Ah, so it prefixes
12:43 < selpahi> {ki} is a preposition
12:43 < _mukti_> vlaste: ki (class)
12:43 < vlaste> ki (class) = KI
12:45 < _mukti_> Is there an equivalent in cekitaujau?
12:46 < selpahi> Maybe {ke'a}.
12:46 < rutytar> i'm going to do some art stuff to it, so i want to make sure i don't need to edit it any more
12:46 < selpahi> I'm almost the only one who uses {ki} that way
12:46 < _mukti_> Yeah, I hadn't encountered it yet. And it seems like you've moved on!
12:47 < _mukti_> It's an interesting particle, though.
12:47 < selpahi> It's necessary
12:47 < _mukti_> I see that
12:47 < selpahi> rutytar: The rinka sentence confuses me
12:47 < rutytar> how so?
12:47 < selpahi> "it's true so it can be caused" ?
12:48 < selpahi> Is that intended?
12:48 < rutytar> "because it's true, it's there to be interacted with"
12:48 < selpahi> rinka means cause.
12:48 < rutytar> i guess it's a bit liberal,  but it's kind of a weird sentence in english as well
12:49 < selpahi> "interact" is difficult.
12:49 < rutytar> can be effected was more what i was goign for
12:49 < rutytar> it seems malgli to discredit a translation because the place structure seems strange
12:50 < selpahi> It's not about place structure, but about rinka being the wrong word
12:51 < selpahi> It's not about causing the truth, since the truth is already there. Interact here means affect or interact
12:51 < selpahi> But jikca doesn't work
12:51 < selpahi> I'd make a new word.
12:51 < selpahi> Because the lujvo would be too long
12:52 < rutytar> what about "se zukte"?
12:52 < selpahi> affect or change  or be changed by *
12:52 < rutytar> the english is "it is what is there to be interacted with"
12:53 < rutytar> seems basically to be "what there is to work with"
12:53 < selpahi> I read it as "what there is to face"
12:54 < rutytar> deal with, then
12:54 < rutytar> kurji?
12:54 < rutytar> no, not really
12:55 < rutytar> kakne
12:55 < selpahi> No.
12:55 < selpahi> A new brivla is needed.
12:55 < selpahi> This isn't the first time I'm struggling with "interact"
12:56 < selpahi> It's a kind of ckini
12:56 < selpahi> But there is no good seltau
12:58 < rutytar> nu doesn't work then, it should be ka
12:59 < rutytar> ri jetnu ja'e ka ka'e — ri
12:59 < rutytar> wouldn't that be better?
12:59 < _mukti_> {jikca}, but not social
12:59 < rutytar> ri jetnu ja'e ka ka'e kakne ri
12:59 < rutytar> ^ does that work grammatically?
12:59 < _mukti_> jikca ro'a cu'i
13:07 < selpahi> You want to follow {ja'e} with a sumti, so use {lo}
13:08 < selpahi> {nu} is better than {ka}
13:08 < selpahi> {ja'e lo ka} or {ja'e lo nu}
13:08 < rutytar> okay
13:08 < selpahi> {kakne ri} is weird.
13:08 < rutytar> how about {.i ri jetnu ja'e ro lo nu ka'e kakne ri}
13:08 < rutytar> ignoring kakne for now
13:08 < selpahi> The truth isn't an ability
13:09 < selpahi> I'm not sure what the point of the {ro} is
13:10 < rutytar> the english is "And because it's true, it is what is there to be interacted with."
13:11 < rutytar> "it is what is there" seems to imply "all" to me
13:11 < selpahi> Okay, but then the {ro} is in the wrong place. And maybe you want {po'o}
13:11 < rutytar> where would you put it?
13:11 < selpahi> Although generally one thing existing doesn't mean other things don't exist
13:12 < selpahi> "it is all there is" is {po'o}
13:12 < selpahi> "only the truth is there"
13:12 < selpahi> That's what your "all" means
13:13 < selpahi> {ro} doesn't work without heavy refactoring
13:13 < rutytar> but ro is in the wrong place… where is the right place?
13:13 < selpahi> {ro X} means "each X"
13:13 < selpahi> The right place is in a differently worded sentence.
13:14 < selpahi> In your sentence you need {po'o}
13:14 < rutytar> :(
13:14 < _mukti_> Still thinking about "interact". {jai galfi} ?
13:14 < _mukti_> Or since its "interacted with", se galfi
13:14 < selpahi> I think interact is something like "being in a cause-and-effect relationship", so rinka/ni'anfu ckini or something.
13:15 < _mukti_> rinka simxu
13:15 < selpahi> In my version I used {kau} instead of {ro} or {po'o}
13:17  * nuzba @hubskihose: ZA'O by Djemynai, a Lojban rap album #language #music http://dlvr.it/BVkvLH [http://bit.ly/1L9fBFk]
13:19 < _mukti_> ui
13:21 < _mukti_> So I see you used {jikca} in your version. Do you think jikca should be more broad than the "social" gloss would imply?
13:21 < rutytar> so {ki'u lo nu ri jetnu kei ri kau se jikca} - could this be worded as {{ki'u lo nu ri jetnu kei kau jikca ri}?
13:21 < selpahi> No, jikca is wrong.
13:22 < selpahi> It's a place holder
13:22 < rutytar> but grammatically, are the equivalent?
13:22 < rutytar> *they
13:22 < selpahi> I was talking to mukti
13:22 < rutytar> ah
13:22 < selpahi> They aren't equivalent.
13:23 < selpahi> The {kau} has to follow {ri}
13:23 < selpahi> And {nu jetnu kei jikca} is a tanru
13:23 < selpahi> Add {cu}
13:23 < selpahi> {ki'u lo nu ri jetnu cu jikca ri kau}
13:23 < selpahi> This is equivalent
13:24 < rutytar> okay
13:24 < rutytar> thanks
13:24 < rutytar> i'm going to stick with kakne for now
13:24 < rutytar> that's how i interpret it
13:24 < selpahi> In the last line, the {ri} should be {ra} I think
13:25 < selpahi> In my opinion {kakne} makes no sense, but it's up to you :)
13:26 < rutytar> {kakne ri} = "ri can be done" is what i'm thinking
13:26 < rutytar> i guess truth can't really be done
13:27 < rutytar> pilno?
13:27 < rutytar> it's too vague a concept
13:28 < selpahi> If you don't want lujvo or zi'evla, then a tanru like {stika ckini} is probably your best bet
13:28 < _mukti_> ni'o mi va'o lo nu tanxe lo tabjme cu djica lo ka jinvi lo du'u tanxe lo tabjme .i je bo mi va'o lo nu na ku tanxe lo tabjme cu djica lo ka jinvi lo du'u na ku tanxe lo tabjme .i je bo .ai mi na krici lo na se djica be mi
13:28 < selpahi> Replace stika with something from galfi/rinka/cnegau/ni'anfu if you like
13:30 < selpahi> That last sentence needs to be treated with c are.
13:30 < selpahi> care*
13:30 < _mukti_> Yes, I was sensing a disturbance in the Scope
13:30 < selpahi> An example where {jai} makes all the difference
13:31 < selpahi> {krici lo na se djica} vs {krici lo poi'i mi na djica lo nu mi krici ke'a}
13:31 < selpahi> This is an ambiguity that English has but Lojban doesn't
13:31 < _mukti_> {poi'i} ... where does he get all these wonderful toys
13:32 < rutytar> i've got to go now. thanks everyone
13:32 < selpahi> Take care
13:32 < _mukti_> co'o la .rutytar.
13:32 < rutytar> i just started school so my time i can devote to lojban is thin, but i'll try anyway
13:32 < rutytar> co'o
13:33 < selpahi> mi xagji
13:34 < _mukti_> .e'u ko citka
13:35  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
13:35  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
13:36 < _mukti_> ua la .cogas. cu sanga
13:36 < _mukti_> https://twitter.com/oka_iu_tcan/status/620236273416978432
13:49 < selpahi> mi pu za tinju'i
13:49 < selpahi> .i ui jbozgike
13:49 < selpahi> .i xu do pu'i tinju'i lo .itku'ile zgike noi cnino
13:50 < selpahi> (https://www.reddit.com/r/Ithkuil/comments/3cw5xt/introducing_kaduat%C3%A1n_featuring_david_j_peterson/)
13:51 < selpahi> mi nelci .i ie mi nelci
13:54 < _mukti_> ie mi pu tinju'i .i ku'i mi na se bangu lo .iku'ile
13:54 < Ilmen> .a'u
13:54 < Ilmen> jbo: ni'anfu
13:54 < mensi> ni'anfu = su'o pagbu be x1 cu rinka su'o pagbu be x2 |>>> ahernai
13:54 < Ilmen> wa
13:54 < _mukti_> .i ku'i mi gleki lo nu tinju'i lo cnino runbau zgike
13:54 < Ilmen> simsa zo rinpau pe mi
13:55 < astroendjisai> .i xu la .mensi. xamgu tarti
13:56 < selpahi> la mensi cu xamgu tarti
13:56 < astroendjisai> xamgu
14:08 < astroendjisai> lujvo: zukte bitygau
14:08 < mensi> zuk[2949], zu'er[4438], zukty[5079]
14:08 < astroendjisai> Just curious
14:09 < selpahi> looks like a bug
14:09 < selpahi> gleki: ^
14:10 < astroendjisai> bitygau is already a lujvo, should that matter?
14:10 < selpahi> Even if one isn't supposed to enter lujvo there, it still shouldn't output something like that
14:11 < astroendjisai> Ah
14:11 < astroendjisai> So is it not possible to create a lujvo from a tanru already containing a lujvo?
14:11 < selpahi> It's possible
14:11 < astroendjisai> Ah.
14:12 < astroendjisai> Since the other day I've been trying to think up some way to say "1 convinces 2 to do action 3"
14:12 < selpahi> But it can also be thought of as making an entirely new lujvo with those same three rafsi, rather than from a lujvo and a gismu
14:12 < astroendjisai> Ah
14:12 < selpahi> afk, eating. Maybe someone else can help you
14:15 < astroendjisai> I'm not in any hurry, that same day we found a workaround by just using 'convince it is true that it is good to do [action]. Example: mi bitygau da lo du'u xamgu fa lo nu tadni la .lojban. (not that that ever happens)
14:15 < Ilmen> mo'u zgana la'oi Kaduatán
14:15 < Ilmen> .i pluka
14:29  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
14:30 < ctefa`o> co'o rodo
14:31 < Ilmen> co'o cliva
17:25 < zipcpi> vlaste: cmevo (gimka)
17:25 < vlaste> zo cmevo gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo cmevo gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
17:28 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/brivycme
17:29 < zipcpi> e'a ro prenu poi aidji cu jmina
17:58 < zipcpi> Someone needs to add "la vrici"; I still don't know what it means
18:02 < zipcpi> k: jbo'irci
18:02 < mensi> (CU [Z:jbo'irci VAU])
18:06 < zipcpi> k: jbouitki
18:06 < mensi> (CU [Z:jbouitki VAU])
19:12 < deltab> how is 'brivycme' formed?
19:15 < zipcpi> brivo + cmene
19:16 < zipcpi> brivo is an experimental gismu; perhaps {brivlacme} should be a synonym
19:18 < deltab> ki'e
19:21 < zipcpi> k: mikranti
19:21 < mensi> (CU [L:mikranti VAU])
19:32 < astroendjisai> I'm wanting to try to translate something (short prose or something) as an exercise in figuring out how Lojban works. I'm going this route since I can't convince anyone to learn it with me so I can speak it with them. Any suggestions for what to try and translate?
19:32 < zipcpi> Short stories? Something you might be interested in
19:33 < zipcpi> Perhaps even instructional texts; Lojban does have "too many" translated fiction
19:33 < astroendjisai> True.
19:33 < astroendjisai> Heck, I could even just straight up try to write something.
19:33 < zipcpi> Mhm
19:33 < astroendjisai> I have a mad plan. AHAHAHAHAHA
19:34 < astroendjisai> Write a daily journal but in Lojban. And perhaps Japanese since that's the language I'm actually supposed to be learning.
19:35 < zipcpi> :p
19:35 < Tachyon`> anyone translated the last question into lojban?
19:36 < zipcpi> Oh that one
19:38 < astroendjisai> Actually I won't do that for privacy issues since I'll end up wanting to get someone to check it for me. Hmm.
19:39 < clakre> near as I can tell, the most popular use for lojban is to discuss changes to lojban in lojban
19:39 < astroendjisai> I thought it would be fun to use it as sort of a code language with my friends but nobody'll go for it.
19:41 < astroendjisai> I guess I can use it to keep notes or something for myself that only I'll understand. At the very least I'll develop some sort of pidgin-Lojban.
22:15 < zipcpi> k: mikca'o
22:15 < mensi> (CU [L:mikca'o VAU])
22:33 < zipcpi> k: poltepruxi
22:33 < mensi> (CU [Z:poltepruxi VAU])
22:33 < zipcpi> k: poltevanci
22:33 < mensi> (CU [Z:poltevanci VAU])
22:34 < zipcpi> k: polteru'i
22:34 < mensi> (CU [Z:polteru'i VAU])
22:44 < zipcpi> k: uitkipedi
22:44 < mensi> (CU [Z:uitkipedi VAU])
23:04 < gleki> im not against lujvo. im more against short rafsi
23:05 < gleki> for "I stay in the building" i just say it literally {mi stali bu'u lo dinju}
23:36 < gleki> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hornbostel%E2%80%93Sachs
23:36 < gleki> ^ that's nice
--- Day changed Mon Jul 13 2015
00:05 < gleki> mensi: doi selpa lo anfora zo'u da'i ma'a vimcu lo lerfu anfora i je ku'i co'aku ma xe fanva zoi gy. I use WWW .gy.
00:05 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.selpa.gy. di'a cusku da
00:12 < zipcpi> vlaste: jinda (gimka)
00:12 < vlaste> zo jinda gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo jinda gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
00:14 < durka42> coi
00:14 < gleki> coi jinda i coi durka
00:14 < durka42> mi zvati la .tubingen.
00:15 < gleki> xu la iutubingen
00:15 < zipcpi> tu~bi~nge~n .y.
00:15 < zipcpi> ki'a
00:19 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/brivycme doi durka do'u xu do stidi lo ka'e se jmina
00:20 < zipcpi> .ije xu da mabla
00:22 < zipcpi> mi no'e birti tu'ai <la terjansu> li'u ki'u lo nu mi na kelci
00:22 < gleki> xu la nu jansu
00:22 < zipcpi> ju'ocu'i
00:28 < gleki> only now i realized that djemynai is DJ-emynai
00:55 < durka42> zipcpi: when we were playing we called it {la kibjasyselkei}
00:55 < durka42> or {la jasyselkei} for the non-web version I guess
00:55 < zipcpi> ua
00:56 < zipcpi> I think I'll list both {la jasyselkei} and {la terjansu} as variants
00:58 < Amnadya> I called it {la nu jansu}
00:59 < zipcpi> I somewhat dislike NU in names because sometimes it needs to be closed, which ruins the "name"-ness IMO
00:59 < zipcpi> Unless it is going to actually have sumti
00:59 < selpahi> .
00:59 < mensi> selpahi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: lo anfora zo'u da'i ma'a vimcu lo lerfu anfora i je ku'i co'aku ma xe fanva zoi gy. I
00:59 < mensi> use WWW .gy. | 2015-07-13T07:05:55.882Z
01:00 < gleki> xu lu mi pilno la'e li vy bu vy bu vy bu li'u
01:06 < Amnadya> .i re da ralju cumki .i pa mai sa'u co'u ta'e pilno lo lerfu tu'a lo zasni sa'e nai ru'e .anfora (to mu'a lo mlatu cu klama .i my. xagji sei zasni .anfora toi) je co'a pilno fi ra'u tu'a lo na'e zasni sa'e nai ru'e .anfora (to mu'a CLL ja BPFK ja NSA sei cmene simsa  toi) (to jalge fa lo nu jdika lo ka cafne toi)
01:07 < Amnadya> .i ja re mai
01:07 < Amnadya> pavgau lo lerfu joi lo namcu
01:07 < Amnadya> ja'e lo nu lo lerfu cu namcu
01:07 < gleki> je'e
01:08 < Amnadya> .i lo re moi danfu cu jai se sarcu lo nu co'a pilno lo simsa be zo li ja zo me'o
01:08 < Amnadya> .i da'i finti lo cnino poi cupra lo cmene
01:08 < gleki> i ku'i ma ca ba'e ti cu snura traji i pe'i lo remoi
01:08 < Amnadya> .i ji'a sarcu fa lo nu finti lo cnino je xamgu .anfora bo sumka'i
01:09 < Amnadya> kei va'o lo nu lo lerfu co'u se pilno
01:09 < gleki> lo nu go'i na nabmi mi
01:09 < Amnadya> je'e
01:09 < gleki> i ku'i lo mupli pe zo'oi WWW cu jai nabmi
01:10 < Amnadya> en:la'ai
01:10 < mensi> la'ai = [LOhU] otherwise lojbanic name, ending in a vowel; multiple names delimited by pauses.
01:10 < Amnadya> en:li'ai
01:10 < mensi> li'ai = [LI] unevaluated mekso as name.
01:10 < gleki> ma'oi li vau o'u
01:10 < gleki> i sa'e na o'u cnino selmaho
01:10 < gleki> jbo: li'ai
01:10 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
01:10 < gleki> je'e
01:11 < gleki> en: research
01:11 < mensi> 3 da se tolcri: boltsemaku, lenguua, skestu
01:11 < Amnadya> .i va'o lo nu fenki ka'e gau basti zo li'ai fa zo lai ju'i nai lobypli
01:11 < gleki> en: inquir
01:11 < mensi> 2 da se tolcri: nabmi, nadycai
01:11 < gleki> en: investiga
01:11 < mensi> 2 da se tolcri: cipcta, xigzo
01:11 < zipcpi> mi za'o nelci ru'e le lerfu anfora ki'u lo nu va'o lo nu pilno zo goi kei ka'e pilno lo lerfu anfora noi zmadu lo ka morji se kakne
01:12 < zipcpi> .y. noi zmadu lo ze'oi ko'a anfora
01:12 < Amnadya> mi ta'e no roi pilno zo goi
01:12 < zipcpi> mi so'oroi pilno .i plixau va'o lo ve ciksi
01:13 < gleki> mi pu kucli tu'a lo snura tadji
01:13 < gleki> i le bangu cu cenba i mi nitcu lo stodi
01:13 < Amnadya> la'a su'o snura cu zasti .i ku'i cumki fa lo nu fegli
01:14 < gleki> mi pu vimcu lu abu li'u pe la alsi lo mi vlaste i ku'i zo'oi WWW ca'o renvi 
01:14 < Amnadya> .i lo'u la'e me'o le'u mu'a jai snura je ku'i cu fegli mi
01:14 < gleki> sa'ai alis le'ai
01:15 < gleki> i la vy bu vy bu vy bu co'e
01:15 < zipcpi> .y. di'u lerfu anfora
01:16 < gleki> exp: i la vy bu vy bu vy bu co'e
01:16 < mensi> (i [la {<(¹[vy bu] [vy bu] [vy bu]¹) BOI> co'e} KU] VAU)
01:16 < zipcpi> la co'e pe vy.bu vy.bu vy.bu
01:16 < gleki> i ku'i cmene
01:16 < zipcpi> la mi dirba xirma
01:16 < zipcpi> le gerna cu simsa
01:16 < gleki> i na dunli lu la co'e ku pe vybu vy bu vy bu li'u
01:16 < zipcpi> exp: la co'e ku pe vybu vy bu vy bu
01:16 < mensi> ([{la co'e ku} {pe <(¹[vy bu] [vy bu] [vy bu]¹) BOI> GEhU}] VAU)
01:17 < gleki> exp: lo co'e pe vy bu
01:17 < mensi> ([lo {co'e <pe (¹[vy bu] BOI¹) GEhU>} KU] VAU)
01:17 < zipcpi> .y. mi claxygau zo ku
01:17 < gleki> ie i zo ku vajni
01:18 < zipcpi> va'o lonu zo ku cu claxu kei le mezopemei cu pagbu le cmene
01:18 < zipcpi> .y. mezopemoi
01:19 < gleki> ie ie
01:19 < gleki> i ku'i na danfu tua lo lerfu cmene
01:19 < zipcpi> zo li'ai ka'e .iku'i ka'e fegli
01:21 < gleki> ma'i mi ca'a fegli
01:21 < gleki> i ku'i ca ba'e ti le nabmi cu zasti i mu'a zo'oi 111 ka'e cmene i ta'i ma pilno lo tai cmene
01:22 < zipcpi> pe'i nitcu zo li'ai ja lo'u la'e li le'u
01:22 < gleki> exp: la'e me'o 111 cu bebna
01:22 < mensi> ([la'e {me'o <(¹pa [pa pa]¹) BOI> LOhO} LUhU] [cu {bebna VAU}])
01:23 < gleki> fegli
01:23 < gleki> i fegban
01:23 < zipcpi> u'i
01:23 < gleki> y zo'oi 911 cmene
01:24 < gleki> i je'u mi puza kucli
01:24 < gleki> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban-beginners/jeEZY2nYku4
01:25 < zipcpi> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban-beginners/jeEZY2nYku4 xy~'y zo aksese
01:25 < gleki> mo
01:25 < zipcpi> mi zasni finti zo aksese tau lo cmene po'u zo miky'aksese
01:26 < gleki> i xu do na kakne lo ka tcidu
01:26 < gleki> zoi gy.Therefore one should write {.i ko klacpe la'e me'o sopapa}..gy. jai se stidi la gejyspa
01:26 < zipcpi> ku'i "The missing concept includes opening a file, accessing a webpage, opening a
01:26 < zipcpi> cupboard, opening a book, or accessing a memory location. Opening a cupboard
01:26 < zipcpi> is "kargau", but that's what you do to the door; I'm talking about what you do
01:26 < zipcpi> to the cupboard. Any suggestions?"
01:26 < gleki> zo kargau jai se stidi mi
01:27 < gleki> lo nu kargau lo canko cu simsa lo nu kargau lo cukta
01:27 < zipcpi> kargau is what you do to the door; there needs to be a general word for "access"
01:27 < gleki> kalri = to be accessible
01:28 < zipcpi> Hmm... not sure about that
01:28 < gleki> it's what the definition of ganlo says
01:28 < gleki> although the two words are poorly defined as noticed by guskant
01:28 < zipcpi> x1 is defined as a portal, unless we just want to ignore that
01:29 < gleki> en: ganlo
01:29 < mensi> ganlo = x1 (portal/passage/entrance-way) is closed/shut/not open, preventing passage/access to x2 by x3 (something being
01:29 < mensi> blocked). |>>> As a doorway, but also perhaps a semi-permeable membrane. x3 is blocked by x1. x2 is inaccessible. See
01:29 < mensi> also kalri, pagre, canko, vorme, zunti. |>>> officialdata
01:29 < gleki> x2 is inaccessible
01:29 < gleki> ganlo = to'e kalri
01:29 < zipcpi> zilkarli
01:29 < zipcpi> x1 is accessible to x2
01:29 < zipcpi> *zilkalri
01:29 < gleki> jb: ganlo
01:29 < mensi> ganlo = ganlo — portal  x1(entity)  is closed, preventing access to place  x2(entity)  for object  x3(entity)
01:29 < mensi> :lo ganlo — closed.
01:29 < mensi> :lo vorme cu ganlo lo nenri lo fange — The door is closed not letting the strangers in.
01:29 < mensi> :Related words: kalri, pagre, canko, vorme, zunti
01:30 < gleki> ^ that definition used guskan'ts comments
01:30 < Amnadya> lo vorme je nai lo vrogai cu ganlo
01:30 < gleki> ie
01:30 < gleki> i pe'i lo vrogai na ka'e ganlo
01:31 < Amnadya> .i pe'i pei lo cukta cu simsa lo vorme
01:31 < zipcpi> The thing is x2 is important here, not x1. Like when accessing a webpage, it might be somewhat stretching to put something in x1
01:31 < gleki> do jinvi ma
01:31 < Amnadya> pe'i no'e simsa .i na pagre lo cukta ja lo nenri be ri
01:31 < gleki> lo cukta cu ganlo lo se cukta mi
01:32 < Amnadya> .i lo cukta gacri cu gacri lo se cukta
01:32 < Amnadya> .i srana lo si'o polje
01:32 < zipcpi> I translated Microsoft Access as {la miky'aksese}, very malgli but I just made it up because all I needed was a name, and even Chinese just calls it "Microsoft Access"
01:32 < gleki> lo cukta cu ganlo ri'a tu'a lo gacri
01:33 < gleki> i la mikrysofto kalri
01:33 < zipcpi> And now we want something that {aksese} might mean, but we might want to change it to a different form.
01:35 < Amnadya> lo cukta gacri je lo cukta papri pe ca lo nu "ganlo" cu simsa lo vrogai je nai lo vorme .i lo cukta cu gunma lo gacri joi lo papri .i ma vorme
01:36 < Amnadya> .i pagre ma
01:36 < Amnadya> .i ca lo nu ganlo sei naldra valsi kei lo no gusni cu muvdu fi lo papri fe lo kanla be lo zgana
01:37 < Amnadya> s/lo no/no
01:37 < fenki> Amnadya meant to say: .i ca lo nu ganlo sei naldra valsi kei no gusni cu muvdu fi lo papri fe lo kanla be lo zgana
01:37 < gleki> ma'i do ma ka'e mupli lo ka ganlo
01:37 < Amnadya> lo canko je lo vorme je lo kevna je lo simsa
01:37 < Amnadya> .i srana lo si'o na ka'e pagre
01:37 < Amnadya> .i da zunti ja fanta lo nu pagre
01:38 < Amnadya> .i je da ka'e se vimcu
01:38 < Amnadya> jbo:ganlo
01:38 < mensi> ganlo = lo nu pagre x1 boi (to noi vorme toi) x2 fa x3 fo zi'o cu se zunti zi'o zi'o
01:38 < Amnadya> .i ma pe lo cukta cu vorme
01:40 < gleki> lo cukta cu vorme pe'i
01:40 < gleki> i sa'u lo cukta ka'e cenba lo ka ganlo
01:41 < tsani> .i ku'i naku lo ka vorme cu ka ka'e cenba lo ka ganlo
01:42 < gleki> uanai
01:42 < gleki> i je'upei
01:42 < tsani> je'u
01:42 < tsani> .i lo ka vorme cu srana lo ka ka'e zunti lo ka pagre
01:42 < gleki> i xu naku lo nu lo vrogai cu muvdu cka'e rinka lo nu lo vorme cu cenba lo ka ganlo
01:43 < tsani> .i la .amnadi'a cu drasku pe'i
01:43 < gleki> *ka'e
01:43 < tsani> vlaste: vorme
01:43 < vlaste> vorme = x1 is a doorway/gateway/access way between x2 and x3 of structure x4.
01:44 < gleki> i ja'o ma poi srana lo vorme cu cenba lo ka ganlo
01:44 < tsani> .i ie lo vorme cu cenba lo ka ganlo
01:44 < gleki> i li'a na vrogai
01:44 < Amnadya> .i lo cukta cu vorme ma ma ma
01:44 < tsani> .i ku'i mi si'a jinvi lo du'u lo cukta na vorme
01:45 < tsani> (to ta'o lo kibjudri batke (to me'oi link toi )cu vorme xu toi)
01:45 < gleki> lo cukta cu vorme lo tcidu lo se cukta lo muvdu pelji
01:46 < gleki> i lo kibro tutci zo'u oi aunai casnu
01:46 < gleki> valdi = x1 is a software poorly localized to Lojban by Lojbanist x2
01:47 < gleki> la vi valdi = brivycme, some software near you that is poorly localized
01:58 < zipcpi> vlaste: jonse (gimka)
01:58 < vlaste> zo jonse gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo jonse gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
02:07 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/jonse
02:39  * nuzba @okau_junpe: .ui zabna La kanto nomiĝas "somero sen vi" En Loĵbano. Låten heter "sommar utan dig". På lojban. https://twitter.com/oka_iu_tcan/status/620229220187291648 [http://bit.ly/1TwytBa]
03:04 < ctefa`o> coi
03:06 < gleki> coi
03:07 < ctefa`o> cio gleki
04:20 < Amnadya> I made a little Ithkuil learning collection: http://selpahi.de/ithkuil/learning/collection.html
04:20 < Amnadya> Some links and some quizzes.
04:48  * nuzba @garydale: The unexpected benefits of climate change: Sure, half of Western Canada was on fire, polar bears were ... http://bit.ly/1Hq2afr #lojban [http://bit.ly/1fCmrrB]
04:59 < gleki> da'i do zbasu lo cukta pe ibu i ku'i ba'a JQ na zanru
05:00 < gleki> i ji'a lo uilkinse liste lo itkuiile me'oi root cu mo i xu da ca'o favgau
05:00 < Amnadya> mi djuno no da lo nu go'e
05:00 < zipcpi> xu lo me'oi root cu rafsi
05:00 < gleki> su'ova'ei
05:01 < gleki> i frica lo prefiksi e lo subyfiski e lo infiksi
05:01 < zipcpi> pe'i ei zo rafsi ja lo drata valsi ka'e se pilno fi tau lo drata bangu
05:02 < gleki> y lo so'u bangu cu kakne tu'a lo jetnu rafsi
05:03 < zipcpi> zo rafsido'a zo'o
05:04 < zipcpi> mu'a zo ki'orbi zo'u: zo'oi -kirbi- cu mo
05:04 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/ki'orbi
05:04 < gleki> en: ki'orbi
05:05 < mensi> ki'orbi = x1 is 1024 (2^10) of x2 in dimension/aspect x3 (default units) |>>> Informal combining form: kirbi-. See
05:05 < mensi> kirbibitni, kirbibaitni, kilto. // Series: ki'orbi me'orbi gi'orbi te'orbi pe'orbi xe'orbi ze'orbi go'orbi |>>>
05:05 < mensi> spheniscine
05:06 < gleki> the most pressing fix for alta now is {cu broda noi} support
05:06 < zipcpi> zo selma'o ji'a jai nabmi fai lo simsa
05:07 < zipcpi> xu lo na'e cmavo ka'e se selma'o
05:08 < zipcpi> pe'i zo vlagenkle ja lo simsa
05:10 < Amnadya> is zbaga down?
05:10 < gleki> na ka'e doi la zipcpi
05:10 < gleki> i zo vlakle e'u
05:12 < zipcpi> vlasmukle ji vlagenkle
05:57 < niftg> la mensi .e la makfa mensi ca zvati vau za'a
05:58 < gleki> la makfa mensi cu mo
05:59 < niftg> sampu xe fanva zo'oi magical-imouto
06:00 < niftg> (sa'e se cmene lo go'i)
06:26 < Amnadya> mi piltcu lo do cunso valsi tutci doi la cliva
06:27 < Amnadya> (to #pajvo toi)
06:45 < gleki> en: piltcu
06:45 < mensi> [< pilka nitcu ≈ Crust need] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
06:45 < mensi> piltcu[5878], pi'atcu[6367], pilnitcu[7937], pilkytcu[8008], pi'arnitcu[9526], ...
07:27 < ctefa`o> coi'oi Amnadya
07:47 < Amnadya> Attál.
07:47 < Amnadya> Glawulač żi'alukta ki?
07:49 < niftg> Atta/l .i mi nu'o kakne co jimpe fi lo jufra smuni co itku'ile ku ta'i lo sutra
07:50 < niftg> ithkuil: Atta/l
07:50 < ithkuil> error
07:50 < Amnadya> En-n üareč.
07:50 < niftg> ithkuil: Attál
07:50 < ithkuil> Attál: P1S1/STA-tt-OBL-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-FML/UNFRAMED
07:51 < Amnadya> lu rinsa li'u
07:51 < niftg> xy'y .i nitcu lo glos zei nuncki
07:51 < niftg> lu rinsa li'u zo'u mi pu'i ba'o co'a jimpe .i po'o cipra
07:55 < Amnadya> Glawulač żi'alukta ki?  -- xu do ca lo cabdei cu banzu kanro lifri
07:55 < Amnadya> En-n üareč.  -- a'o na mabla
07:56 < Amnadya> Exhawúl ki? -- xu do jimpe
07:56 < niftg> zoi .itk. Glawulač żi'alukta ki? .itk. zo'u mi puziku jimpe lo du'u lo ka kanro jo'u lo djedi jo'u mi te tavla ku po'o .i caku mi mulno jibni jimpe
07:56 < Amnadya> ua
07:56 < Amnadya> .i'e
07:57 < niftg> nu'o certu tu'a la'oi Adjuncts
07:57 < niftg> la'oi PRA zo'u so'u va'e vau po'o
07:58 < Amnadya> lo .adjunte na jai frili fai ro da .i ku'i la .modalitis. cu jai frili
07:58 < Amnadya> .i ie PRA zo'u nandu sai
08:06 < samcinki> ŭa .itku'ile casnu coi doi nei
08:07 < gleki> CIA ca se nandu fa lo ka tcidu jimpe lo smuni be di'u
08:08 < niftg> sa'e mi nu'o tavla fo lo itku'ile ja'e lo nu nu'o itku'ile casnu
08:09 < niftg> (to'e do'e zo'oi Atta/l)
08:10 < niftg> .ija ta'u casnu lo itku'ile ca'a
08:11 < Amnadya> mi sruma lo du no nu tavysi'u bau lo .itku'ile pu'i fasnu
08:11 < Amnadya> .i da'i lo jbopre ba pa moi
08:12 < Ilmen> Attàwîl
08:12 < Amnadya> lo ka jbopre cu ka certu lo ka facki fi lo cfila
08:12 < gleki> alta: mi ca tavla noi mutce cizra
08:12 < mensi> (I [FA ZOhE] [CU {FASNU <FA (¹LO [NU {<FA mi> <CU (²ca [tavla NF]²) VAU>} KEI] KU¹) (¹noi [{FA ZOhE} {CU <mutce (²cizra NF²)> VAU}] KUhO¹)> VAU}])
08:13 < Amnadya> .i la'a ku'i se jalge lo nu so'i prenu cu na'e se pluka lo ka jikca lo jbopre
08:13 < Amnadya> .u'i zo'o
08:13 < Ilmen> .u'i
08:14 < Ilmen> xu lo cnivla cu zasti lo .itku'ile
08:14 < Amnadya> ru'e
08:14 < Amnadya> .i lo rafsufikse je lo .y me'oi bias cu zasti
08:15 < Ilmen> mu'a pei .i ma da'i mapti zo ŭi mu'a
08:15 < gleki> ca ti mi bilga lo ka zukte lo cipra be lo nu xukau la altatufa ku pe ca co'a spofu ki'u lo nu lu i broda noi mo li'u co'a gendra
08:16 < Amnadya> aqtal -- gleki, .i ku'i zo ui zo'u na djuno .i ka'e na zasti
08:16 < Ilmen> alta: lo nu banfi carvi noi fasnu cu cizra
08:16 < mensi> (I [FA {lo <nu (¹[FA ZOhE] [CU {FASNU <FA (²LO [NU {<FA ZOhE> <CU (³banfi [carvi NF]³) VAU>} KEI] KU²) (²noi [{FA ZOhE} {CU <fasnu NF> VAU}] KUhO²)> VAU}]¹) KEI> KU}] [cu {cizra NF} VAU])
08:17 < gleki> pu je ca gendra
08:17 < Ilmen> je'e la .amnadiĭa
08:17 < Amnadya> vi ji'a carvi fa lo banfi je lo mlatu je lo drata
08:18 < Ilmen> .i ta'o do ma jinvi lo .itku'ile selsa'a
08:18 < gleki> ti'a bu'u lo glico fe ji'a lo gerku cu carvi
08:18 < gleki> sa
08:18 < gleki> i ti'e bu'u lo glico fe ji'a lo gerku cu carvi
08:18 < gleki> sa
08:18 < gleki> i ti'e bu'u lo glico fa ji'a lo gerku cu carvi
08:18 < gleki> i oi se'i mi tatpi
08:18 < gleki> i de'a jundi
08:18 < Amnadya> .i clani sai .i ku'i mi nelci
08:19 < Amnadya> .i ca so'o da ze'u sanga na ku
08:19 < Ilmen> ma'i lo .itku'ile lo bi valsi selsa'a cu da'i banzu lo nu clani mutce
08:19 < Ilmen> .i ja'o banli
08:20 < Ilmen> .i ju'o lo barda pagbu cu voksa claxu .i ku'i lo gunma be ro lo voksa pagbu cu barda banzu ju'o
08:20 < Amnadya> ie
08:21 < Ilmen> * lo ro
08:22 < Amnadya> za'a zoi ty. r  .ty simsa zo ui
08:22 < Amnadya> .i mulno jufra fa zoi ty. T. .ty
08:22 < Amnadya> .u'i
08:22 < Amnadya> .yyy
08:23 < Amnadya> s/T/R.
08:23 < fenki> Amnadya meant to say: .i mulno jufra fa zoi ty. R.. .ty
08:23 < Amnadya> ..
08:23 < Amnadya> ithkuil: r
08:23 < ithkuil> error
08:23 < Amnadya> na naldra doi do!
08:23 < Amnadya> .u'i
08:24 < Amnadya> ithkuil: kal'r
08:24 < ithkuil> kal’r: P1S1/STA-k-OBL-l’r-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
08:24 < Amnadya> uat
08:24 < Amnadya> .oi se'i
08:24 < Amnadya> ithkuil: kala'r
08:24 < ithkuil> kala’r: P1S1/STA-k-OBL-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-EXS-GRT-IFL/UNFRAMED
08:24 < Amnadya> GRT = ui
08:24 < Ilmen> lo .evjekti zunsna cu simlu loka na'e jai cafne
08:25 < Amnadya> zanfu'a
08:26 < Amnadya> ithkuil: an-nar
08:26 < ithkuil> an-nar: Verbal adjunct
08:26 < Amnadya> ...
08:26 < Amnadya> .i'a .i'a
08:27 < Ilmen> zo'oi T mo .i xu co'e zo'oi þ
08:27 < Amnadya> lerbasysre .i zo'oi R
08:27 < Amnadya> .i sinxa no da .i sa'u ga'e zei lerfu
08:27 < Amnadya> .i lo pa moi lerfu pe lo jufra cu ga'e zei co'e ta'e
08:28 < Amnadya> "R." .i mulno jufra
08:28 < Ilmen> je'e
08:29 < Ilmen> zo'oi . cizra .u'i .i sa'u na ba'a ka'e sinxa su'o prosodi
08:29 < Amnadya> ___'ř / ř / an-nař -> .e'o
08:29 < Amnadya> .i lo mokca lerfu cu sinxa lo fanmo be lo jufra
08:29 < Amnadya> bau so'e bangu
08:30 < Ilmen> ku'i ta'e panra lo nu lo prosodi sinxa cu fanmo lo se bacru jufra
08:31 < Amnadya> ie ie
08:32 < Amnadya> ___'ç / ç / an-naç -> ue
08:32 < Ilmen> je'e
08:33 < Amnadya> Ikala'ç ku -> ue do [zukte lo ka] klama
08:33 < Ilmen> cizra fa lo nu lo xromana .itku'ile cu selpau zo'oi dh .i paunai ki'u ma na co'e zo'oi ð
08:33 < Amnadya> an-naç ikal ku -> ue do [zukte lo ka] klama
08:33 < Amnadya> .i dunli
08:33 < Amnadya> .i na djuno
08:38 < Amnadya> uebryspoja
08:38 < Ilmen> xu lo galxe ganlo zunsna cu na ka'e linlami si li'erla'i lo moklu ganlo zunsna soi jalge fa lonu zo'oi p’ na ka'e .ambigu
08:40 < Amnadya> xu lo moklu ganlo zunsna cu nazbi zunsna
08:40 < Amnadya> .i ia lo tai girzu na zasti
08:40 < Ilmen> je'e
08:40 < Ilmen> .i mi de'a jundi
08:48 < cliva> Amnadya: zbagazasni.ax.lt
08:48 < cliva> (to lo laldo me DNS ri'a lo na jai se djuno cu jai nabmi toi)
08:48 < Amnadya> ua ki'e
08:58 < fushgrhfhxdz> y
09:02 < fushgrhfhxdz> xu mi jorne
09:02 < Ilmen> coi
09:03 < cliva> jorne
09:03 < cliva> .i xu zu'i za'o na .akti
09:03 < fushgrhfhxdz> ma me zuhi
09:04 < cliva> la parti servere
09:04  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
09:04 < fushgrhfhxdz> oi
09:05 < Ilmen> za'a mi ka'e nerkla
09:05 < fushgrhfhxdz> i la irsis na zvati
09:05 < cliva> ba'a ka'e kompili
09:06  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa gunro fa
09:07 < fushgrhfhxdz> lo du be lo du coha jorne
09:17 < sorpaas> A small question: how do I express "every day" and "every week" in Lojban?
09:19 < cliva> common are: ca ro djedi/jeftu; pa/su'o roi ro djedi/jeftu
09:20 < cliva> though these aren't exactly correct because of overlapping
09:22 < cliva> detydei and detyjeftu maybe
09:27 < sorpaas> Do you mind explaining what means "overlapping" in this case? {ca ro djedi} seems to mean "during all days"? What if I want to express "once a day"?
09:30 < cliva> pa roi ro (lo) detydei, probably
09:30 < cliva> A djedi is just a 24-hour period, not necessarily from 0:00 to 24:00
09:32 < sorpaas> I think I get what you mean. ki'e!
09:40 < Ilmen> ca ro djedi = at each day
09:41 < Ilmen> ca ro djedi pa roi (ku) = at each day one time
09:41 < Ilmen> (one time a day)
09:41 < Ilmen> @ sorpaas
09:41 < gleki> pa roi ro djedi
09:42 < Ilmen> I'm currently checking what's the role of roi's tagged sumti
09:43 < Ilmen> roi: "Quantified tense. Converts a number to an objectively quantified tense interval modifier, indicating that the event takes place n times. When tagging a sumti, the sumti specifies the interval in which the repetitions occur. "
09:43 < Ilmen> So {pa roi ro djedi} seems fine too
09:43 < Ilmen> je'e pei la'oi sorpaas
09:53 <@xalbo> Again, {ro djedi} is weird. There's a {djedi} from midnight to midnight, and another one from 0:01 to 0:01 the next day, and another one from 0:02-0:02, and so on. {ro djedi} would seem to include all of those.
09:54 <@xalbo> This very moment is a part of an infinite number of overlapping djedi.
09:55 <@xalbo> I guess if something happens *exactly* once ever 24 hours, then for any given 24 hour djedi it would happen exactly once during that period. But it still feels wrong.
09:58 < Ilmen> en: djefau
09:58 < mensi> [< djedi fasnu ≈ Full day event] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
09:58 < mensi> djefau[5847], deirfau[6936], djefasnu[7917], djedyfau[7977], deirfasnu[9006], ...
09:58 < Ilmen> jbo: djefau
09:58 < mensi> djefau [< djedi fasnu ≈ Djedi fasnu*] = pa da poi ctemidju fi x2 zo'u x1 se krasi da gi'e se fanmo lo poi'i ge ke'a
09:58 < mensi> ctemidju x2 gi'e balvi da gi no ctemidju cu purci ke'a gi'e balvi da |>>> srana fa zo djedi .e zo ctemidju |>>>
09:58 < mensi> Ilmen
09:59 < Ilmen> za'a I did made a word for "day / period between two consecutive midnights"
10:00 < Ilmen> {djefau}
10:02 < Ilmen> za'a ji'a mi pu lazni loka finti lo rarbau velski
10:02 < gleki> 20 more questions with a score of 10 or more
10:02 < gleki> probably because today i posted to G+ and pinned the area51 post to the top
10:11 < gleki> in altatufa i now have even more difficult tasks, namely autorestore ke'a and ce'u. i m not sure i can do that in pure peg
10:13  * nuzba @Dank_scriptor: bredi lo nu cunso ciska .i ui     #lojban [http://bit.ly/1K1Qshc]
10:23 < gleki> anyone can express loeb and moeb functions in Lojban?
10:49  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
10:50  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa gunro fa
10:50  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa gunro fa
11:09 < gleki> if loeb in programming can make sense e.g. in creating spreadsheet-like apps then in Lojban i have no clue what to aim at.
11:33  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
13:09  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa gunro fa
13:14  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa eqil fa
13:14  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa eqil fa
13:14  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Amnadya fa
13:16 < omni___> coi
13:17 < bigcentaur> cei
13:18 < omni___> cai
13:18 < bigcentaur> .i .u'i lo mi degji cu sakli
13:19 < omni___> je'e
13:24 < omni___> doi la cliva ja la akmnlrse .i ma ralju cmene .i .ei mi ma sivni tavla
13:26 < durka42> coi
13:27 < omni___> coi
13:29 < durka42> mi ja'a ru'e ru'e jorne lo kibro
13:31 < bigcentaur> .i ri'a ma
13:31 < durka42> lo nu mi zvati lo me'oi Jugendherberge
13:32 < durka42> lo .iugendxerberge
13:32 < bigcentaur> .ua
13:32 < durka42> oi valslinku'i
13:32 < omni___> -dx- !
13:32 < durka42> lo .iurgendxerberge
13:32 < omni___> coi la durkavore .i ui do mo'u litru
13:32 < durka42> xu tolcurmi
13:32 < durka42> mi ca'o litru
13:33 < omni___> go'i .i dy. fa'u xy. voksa fa'u na'e voksa zunsna
13:33 < durka42> mi mo'u vofli
13:33 < omni___> ie
13:33 < durka42> lo .iu nai .iurgenderberge
13:34 < durka42> .iu cu'i *
13:34 < omni___> ua ba'e no zabna jbovla be ru cu zasti
13:35 < omni___> (to zoi gy. youth .gy toi)
13:35 < durka42> lo kibro te jorne cu masno jecu se ditcu lo cacra be li mo'a pimu
13:36 < bigcentaur> (sometime, can i get someone to help me understand how zabna / mabla are used?)
13:36 < durka42> lo nalmakcu .u'i
13:36 < omni___> lo cifnu ku ji'a nalmakcu
13:36 < omni___> .i da'i no'e makcu
13:37 < omni___> (to sa'e zoi gy. adolescent .gy toi)
13:37 < omni___> .i ka ca'o binxo lo ka makcu
13:41 < omni___> zo makcubi xu
13:41 < omni___> mi na xebni
13:41 < omni___> .i xu do na nelci doi la mensi
13:41 < mensi> ji'a mi mutce nelci i ie
13:41 < omni___> ie
13:43 < omni___> xu su da pante
13:43 < omni___> 3
13:43 < omni___> 2
13:43 < omni___> 1
13:43 < omni___> za'a na go'i
13:43 < omni___> zo'o
13:44 < omni___> .i ta'o mi pu zi te sidbo fi lo cnino .i lu .u'y zei sance li'u je lo simsa xoi cafne cu se cusku
13:44 < omni___> .i mi pu pensi zo .asna fa'u zo .esna fa'u zo .isna fa'u zo .osna fa'u zo .usna
13:45 < omni___> .i ku'i zo .asna zasti
13:46 < omni___> .i lo zunsna zo'u ma ni mabla fa mu'a zo sancebe noi sinxa lo by zei zunsna
13:46 < omni___> .i la'a ru'e la zipcpi cu se cinri
13:50 < omni___> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/makcubi
14:01 < cliva> spagetufa: iugynderberge
14:01 < spagetufa> (CU [iugynderberge VAU])
14:01 < omni___> .u'i
14:02 < omni___> makcubi xotli
14:05 < omni___> lo sumstura be zo xotli cu mabla
14:05 < omni___> .i pa mai lo stuzi na vajni .i re mai ma xabju
14:06 < omni___> .i ja ma te friti
14:06 < omni___> .i koi panra ru'e zo gusta
14:11 < dutchie> en:skina
14:11 < mensi> skina = x1 is a cinema/movie/film about x2 [plot/theme/subject/activity], filmmaker x3, for audience x4.
14:11 < dutchie> both the place of viewing a film and the film itself?
14:12 < dutchie> hmm, from looking at other languages, that's probably just wrong
14:13 <@xalbo> Yeah, I suspect that "cinema" is a mnemonic, but not a good gloss.
14:13 < omni___> x1 is a film, not a place.
14:16 < dutchie> can i edit the definition?
14:16 < dutchie> i don't know the protocol around that sort of thing
14:17 < omni___> You shouldn't add officialdata
14:17 < omni___> edit*
14:19 < omni___> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/BPFK_Section:_gismu_Issues
14:19 < omni___> This is a good place to add problematic definitions
14:19 < omni___> Then the BPFK will take care of it.
14:20 < dutchie> ki'e
14:29 < dutchie> mo'u jmina
14:30  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
14:31  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
14:48  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Amnadya fa
14:51  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
14:52  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
15:03  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
16:13 < zipcpi> uese'i mi mabla lo ka malpli lo cipra rafsi
16:13 < zipcpi> u'ese'i
16:21 < zipcpi> http://badconlangingideas.tumblr.com/post/123211547822/404 // va'i, finti lo jbobau, jecu jetmlugau lo du'u ri ja'a rarbau
16:27 < zipcpi> coi la bardykentauru
16:28 < bigcentaur> coi la zipcpi
16:29 < bigcentaur> .i do mo
16:32 < zipcpi> mi kanro ki'e
16:36 < bigcentaur> je'e
16:39 < bigcentaur> .i bu'u la'oi montreal cu glare mutce
16:40 < zipcpi> mi zvati la .kuualalumpur.
16:41 < bigcentaur> .ua
16:41 < bigcentaur> .i xu ji'a glare .u'i
16:42 < zipcpi> ne'a ca jacke'o li rexa
16:44 < zipcpi> k: faxrenai
16:44 < mensi> (CU [FA:fa L:xrenai] VAU)
16:44 < bigcentaur> .i do xabju je'i vitke
16:45 < zipcpi> xabju
16:45 < zipcpi> k: falrenai
16:45 < mensi> (CU [Z:falrenai VAU])
16:46 < bigcentaur> .i .ua mi pu noroi klama la .kuualalumpur.
16:47 < zipcpi> ne'i le mejgu'e (to va'i la'oi Malaysia toi)
16:50 < bigcentaur> .i mi no'e djuno be fi la'oi Malaysia mutce
17:03 < astroendjisai> Hi. Question. Would "le famyma'o be selsa'a" be a good translation for "The Terminator Song"?
17:04 < astroendjisai> Because I have an...idea that I'd like to implement.
17:08 < zipcpi> I don't think {be} is right
17:08 < zipcpi> It could be left out altogether, or replaced with {bo} if you need it for meter
17:09 < astroendjisai> Okay. This is the title, it doesn't actually appear in the song. Thanks
17:09 < astroendjisai> Oh yes now I see what I did wrong
17:41 < astroendjisai> gloss: .i mi klama do le du'u zdani fa lo du'u mi tavla le du'u mikce mi vau kei ku ko'a goi le zdani ku fi'o cusku fe'u lu ko'a xamgu vau li'u vau kei ku vau kei ku vau
17:41 < mensi> . me come(s) you the bridi abstract nest (1:) a(n) bridi abstract me talk the bridi abstract doctor me ] end abstraction, it 1 pro sumti assign the nest, selbri to modal say end modal selbri
17:41 < mensi>  < it 1 nice ] > ] end abstraction, ] end abstraction, ]
17:42 < astroendjisai> Now I'm just hoping that isn't a load of nonsense.
17:44 < astroendjisai> This isn't as good of an idea as I thought. Hmm.
17:45 < zipcpi> u'i
17:46 < astroendjisai> The idea was to get a ridiculously long string of famyma'o at the end and make that the chorus of the song
17:46 < zipcpi> Hm kinda like a grammatical old woman that swallowed the fly or something
17:47 < zipcpi> Start with a simple sentence
17:47 < zipcpi> Then gradually complicate it
17:47 < astroendjisai> Oh hey that'll work
17:49 < astroendjisai> I'm trying to end up saying "I come to you from the house about which me and my doctor spoke about saying that it was good"
17:56 < zipcpi> k: vultru'e
17:56 < mensi> (CU [Z:vultru'e VAU])
18:02 < vultrue> huh?
18:03 < zipcpi> Just testing :p
18:03 < zipcpi> Now and then I like to quiz myself on the morphology
18:12 < phma> coi
18:16 < zipcpi> coi
18:18 < phma> I have an idea: at jbonunsla, post the letters B, D, N, and V on the walls at the appropriate positions and talk in geographic directions.
18:19 < zipcpi> Hehe
18:19 < zipcpi> Too bad I'll never attend one
18:20 < phma> I've been reading about the Yimidhirr and other peoples who talk like that.
18:20 < zipcpi> Oh, you mean as opposed to left-right etc.
18:21 < phma> yes. {manti be'a lo do jamfu} and the like.
18:21 < zipcpi> If I ever become an eccentric billionaire, all my buildings will have compass roses on the ceilings
18:22 < zipcpi> It's also interesting that in video-game worlds, characters talk about compass directions a lot more than in real life :p
18:23 < phma> Why won't you attend one?
18:23 < zipcpi> Distance
18:23 < phma> Dismoklu
18:23 < zipcpi> u'i
18:24 < phma> How far are you from the nearest Lojbanist?
18:24 < zipcpi> ra'oi -dis- cu rafsi zo dinso noi cipra gismu
18:25 < phma> cpitance
18:25 < zipcpi> mi na sanji lo drata jbopre poi meljo
18:25 < phma> bindo xu? i sralo xu?
18:26 < zipcpi> na sajni ji'a
18:26 < zipcpi> mi paroi stuvi'e le sralygu'e
18:27 < zipcpi> melbi zanfri
18:33 < mi_se_pilno> coi ro do
18:33 < phma> coi la se pilno
18:34 < mi_se_pilno> do mo
18:34 < mi_se_pilno> or coi la phama
18:34 < phma> mi vreta gi'e tumymre gi'e sampla li'o
18:37 < mi_se_pilno> .i xu do sampla
18:39 < phma> go'i
18:40 < mi_se_pilno> .i xu do nelci 'it'/ how do you say it?
18:40 < phma> in this case, "la'edi'u"
18:40 < phma> go'i
18:41 < mi_se_pilno> oh yeah! need to remember that
18:43 < mi_se_pilno> .i do ma sampla
18:43 < ldlework> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI1xuE6OUuU
18:45 < phma> mi sampla zoi .gy. Bezitopo .gy lo nu tumymre
18:48 < mi_se_pilno> .i xu nu tumymre cu simlu la gugyl maps
18:50 < phma> ckini .iku'i na simlu
18:50 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/brivycme
18:50 < zipcpi> la guglycartu ?
18:52 < mi_se_pilno> mo .iku'i
18:53 < mi_se_pilno> go'i la zipcpi
18:54 < zipcpi> mi finti lo vreji befi lo brivycme
18:54 < zipcpi> ki'oi la jbouitki
18:54 < phma> la bercribe cu targri
18:55 < zipcpi> ua moi'ibu'o
19:01 < mi_se_pilno> you guys lost me at ckini .iku'i. .i ro do ma tavla
19:02 < tsani> .i coi la se pilno .i do se pilno fi ma
19:05 < mi_se_pilno> .i nu mi se pilno cu pluka ro do
19:24 < bigcentaur> is there a good brivla for something like "x1 swears that x2, invoking x3"?
19:25 < noncomcinse> coi lo jundi jbopre do'u
19:25 < zipcpi> There is {nupre} but I'm not sure there is a specific word for "swear" in that sense
19:26 < noncomcinse> What sense?
19:26 < zipcpi> The sense of invoking a deity or a fate
19:26 < bigcentaur> yeah "i swear by the beard of zeus"
19:26 < bigcentaur> or "by grabthar's hammer"
19:26 < bigcentaur> etc
19:26 < zipcpi> {xusra} is also related
19:26 < bigcentaur> yeah
19:26 < bigcentaur> it's related
19:27 < bigcentaur> maybe {xusra} with a good {fi'o ...}
19:27 < zipcpi> Problem is I don't think there's a good fi'o
19:27 < noncomcinse> "I swear to God, I'll kill you." - .i mi nupre loka do mrobi'o kei la .cev.
19:27 < zipcpi> du'u ai, I think
19:28 < zipcpi> Not ka; {ka} requires a ce'u
19:28 < noncomcinse> Right.
19:28 < noncomcinse> {nu}, then.
19:28 < noncomcinse> du'u is a bridi, nupre2 is an event/state
19:29 < noncomcinse> xu malgli
19:29 < zipcpi> "aicai do mrobi'o xoi mi nupre ke'a la cevni"
19:29 < zipcpi> Dunno
19:29 < noncomcinse> The ke'a in xoi becomes a lonu, right?
19:30 < zipcpi> Basically yes
19:30 < noncomcinse> .i'e
19:30 < noncomcinse> I should do flash cards for the UI I don't know
19:32 < noncomcinse> en: a'u
19:32 < mensi> a'u = [UI1] attitudinal: interest - disinterest - repulsion. |>>> See also cinri, selcni. |>>>
19:32 < mensi> officialdata
19:33 < noncomcinse> .i mi na djuno lodu makau smuni kei la'e lo'u<< .a'a .a'e .a'i / .e'a .e'e .e'i / .i'a .i'o .i'u / .u'a .u'o / .o'a .o'e .o'i .o'u / io >>le'u
19:33 < noncomcinse> .i na djuno fi lo paxa cinmo valsi
19:35  * nuzba @bgcarlisle: Little bit of irony: {jundi} was the Lojban gismu that I always had the hardest time remembering when doing the flashcards. [http://bit.ly/1HYU57f]
19:37 < noncomcinse> I should do gismu flashcards, too.
19:50 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/dimnu'e *shrugs*
19:55 < bigcentaur> whoa
19:55 < bigcentaur> you found it
19:55 < zipcpi> No I made it
19:55 < bigcentaur> oh
19:55 < bigcentaur> who
19:55 < bigcentaur> whoa
19:55 < bigcentaur> you made it!
19:56 < zipcpi> I think my {nupre} example is generally sufficient, but it might be useful to have a short word for "He takes an oath"
19:56 < zipcpi> Also it makes the semantic meaning of "promising to a bad fate" a bit clearer
20:01 < bigcentaur> i like it
20:04 < zipcpi> Hm think x3 is just a fate; deities should be tu'a-raised. Because you might also want to tu'a-raise a treasured possession, like the hairs on your head or something :p
20:05 < zipcpi> "mi dimnu'e lo du'u la'e di'u jetnu kei lo ka lindi ce'u" = "I swear that is the truth, or may lightning strike me down" :p
20:12 < clakre> deities should definitely always be tu'a-raised; they get quite cross if they're not.
20:12 < zipcpi> Haha
20:12 < noncomcinse> .i lo xeckule zerle'a lo mi naljmive krirmsa tricu mi
20:13 < zipcpi> I think you left out a {cu}
20:14 < noncomcinse> lo'ai xeckule sa'ai xeckule cu le'ai
20:15 < noncomcinse> .i mi ji'a xruti zerle'a baku
20:17  * nuzba @la_taun: ge'uru'e milxe cando pixra je ciska .i .y. #lojban http://t.co/8189jWlLrq [http://bit.ly/1CB6HiN]
20:18 < noncomcinse> TIL ma'oi GOI has a famyma'o
20:18 < zipcpi> lo'u ge'uru'e le'u ki'a
20:18 < noncomcinse> la'a srera
20:19 < zipcpi> u'i
20:19 < noncomcinse> .i ku'i nalvai lonu mi cilre fi zo goi
20:19 < noncomcinse> si zo ge'u
20:19 < zipcpi> ie
20:27 < noncomcinse> .i ca mo fa lo jbobau
20:30 < zipcpi> xu sanga
20:49 < noncomcinse> ja'a sanga
20:59  * nuzba @slaimsan: lo mi bindo pendo     be lo xindo xendo     cu ca ca'o cando     #lojban [http://bit.ly/1CB9Pes]
21:08 < zipcpi> u'i
21:45 < zipcpi> {cei} might not actually be very useful except for use with {me'oi}/{mu'oi}, because it's hard to define a place structure that way
21:46 < zipcpi> I think {lo ka mi tavla do ce'u ce'u kei goi me'ei broda} may be generally more practical.
23:02 < tsani> .i .u'i lo pu selsku cu jai mukti lo nu mi co'a tinju'i la'e lu lo jbobau cu mo li'u
23:04 < zipcpi> mi puzi co'a sanji zo vandani u'isai
23:05 < gleki> so it's generally that i need to connect to this postgres db to start developing an edidint ginterface. anyone has a copy of JVS db?
23:05 < zipcpi> lu mulno caksova li'u pe'a
23:06 < zipcpi> srana fa zo'oi 糟糕
23:06 < zipcpi> lu festi kenka li'u pe'a
23:07 < zipcpi> xu lo pe'a mulno caksova cu te zbasu lo pe'a festi kenka iau u'i
23:07 < gleki> zo caksova cu morsi vau xunai
23:07 < zipcpi> .y. mi ca'a pilno .iku'i le terbri...
23:08 < zipcpi> ka'eku zo djaso'a xagmau?
23:09 < gleki> jb: sovda
23:09 < mensi> sovda = sovda — x1(entity)  is an egg or pollen from organism  x2(entity)
23:09 < mensi> :lo sovda — egg.
23:09 < mensi> :mi pu lebna so'o lo sovda be lo jipci — I took several hen eggs.
23:09 < mensi> :Comment: sovda is pollen, tsiju is spore or embryo-containing egg. Hen eggs used as food are usually unfertilized and
23:09 < mensi> thus are sovda.
23:09 < mensi> :Related words: ganti, gutra, mamta, patfu, rorci, lanbi, tarbi
23:09 < zipcpi> je'eru'e
23:10 < zipcpi> xu lo pe'a mulno sovda cu te zbasu lo pe'a festi kenka
--- Day changed Tue Jul 14 2015
00:19 < gleki> alta: mi broda do vau noi mo
00:19 < mensi> (I [FA ZOhE] [CU {FASNU <FA (¹LO [NU {<FA mi> <CU (²broda NF²) (²FE do²) vau>} KEI] KU¹) (¹noi [{FA ZOhE} {CU <mo VAU>}] KUhO¹)> VAU}])
00:19 < gleki> alta: mi broda noi mo
00:19 < mensi> (I [FA ZOhE] [CU {FASNU <FA (¹LO [NU {<FA mi> <CU (²broda NF²) VAU>} KEI] KU¹) (¹noi [{FA ZOhE} {CU <mo VAU>}] KUhO¹)> VAU}])
00:20 < gleki> i also changed prenex rule
00:21 < gleki> subsentence = expr:(prenex* bridi)
00:27 < durka42> alta: i
00:27 < mensi> (i [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
00:28 < gleki> alta: 
00:28 < mensi> (I [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
00:29 < gleki> i think what's missing here is the prenex
00:29 < gleki> i lo nu xo'e zo'e cu co'e do'e zo'u fa zo'e cu co'e
00:31 < durka42> alta: mi
00:31 < mensi> (I [FA mi] [CU {COhE VAU}])
00:31 < durka42> alta: noi
00:31 < mensi> (I [FA ZOhE] [CU {ME ZOhE <noi (¹FA ZOhE¹) (¹CU [COhE VAU]¹)> KUhO}])
00:31 < durka42> alta: noi noi
00:31 < mensi> (I [FA ZOhE] [CU {ME ZOhE <noi (¹FA ZOhE¹) (¹CU [ME ZOhE {noi <FA ZOhE> <CU (²COhE VAU²)>} KUhO]¹)> KUhO}])
00:31 < durka42> alta: noi vau noi
00:31 < mensi> (I [FA ZOhE] [CU {ME ZOhE <noi (¹FA ZOhE¹) (¹CU [FASNU {FA <LO (²NU [{FA ZOhE} {CU <COhE vau>}] KEI²) KU> <noi (²[FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}]²) KUhO>} VAU]¹)> KUhO}])
00:32 < durka42> cunso .u'i
00:37 < gleki> do kusru
00:40 < ComradeBecca> ma kusru ma
00:41 < gleki> ei ma'a kurji lo gentufa
00:41 < gleki> i ku'i la durka cu jai bapli lo nu lo gentufa cu dukse gunka
00:45 < gleki> durka42: xu do kakne lo ka jmina fi la nuzba fe RSS pe le uitki
00:46 < durka42> cumki
00:46 < durka42> ma judri
00:51 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/api.php?hidebots=1&days=7&limit=50&action=feedrecentchanges&feedformat=atom
00:53 < durka42> je'e
01:12 < gleki> LIVLABOT: a simple version of la sutysisku searching for Ithkuil rafsi  made available http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/ithkuil/index.html#sisku/banana
02:48  * nuzba @kotatsu_mi: ロジバン - Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%AD%E3%82%B8%E3%83%90%E3%83%B3 [http://bit.ly/1Rw36ce]
03:02  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
03:05 < gleki> https://github.com/pegjs/pegjs/commit/da57118a43a904f753d44d407994cf0b36358adc
03:31  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
03:36 < gleki> the master version of pegjs didnt want to work for me though
03:45 < zipcpi> exp: broda cei me'au ka mi brode do ce'u ce'u
03:45 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "e" found.
03:45 < zipcpi> exp: me'au ka mi brode do ce'u ce'u
03:45 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "e" found.
03:45 < gleki> me'au eats only sumti
03:45 < zipcpi> Right
03:45 < zipcpi> exp: broda cei me'au lo ka mi brode do ce'u ce'u
03:45 < mensi> (CU [broda {cei <me'au (¹lo [ka {mi <CU (²brode [do ce'u ce'u] VAU²)>} KEI] KU¹) MEhU>}] VAU)
03:46 < zipcpi> Just wondering what's the best way to define a word with a place structure
03:46 < zipcpi> Within a text
03:47 < zipcpi> Really perhaps {cei me'au lo ka} should be one word.
03:49 < zipcpi> Maybe it could be in SEI
03:49 < zipcpi> SEI broda mi brode do ce'u ce'u
03:50 < zipcpi> exp: sei broda mi brode do ce'u ce'u
03:50 < mensi> ([sei broda SEhU] [mi {CU <brode (¹do ce'u ce'u¹) VAU>}])
03:50 < zipcpi> exp: sei broda ko'a ko'e ce'ai mi brode do ce'u ce'u
03:50 < mensi> ([sei broda SEhU] [{ko'a ko'e} ce'ai] [mi {CU <brode (¹do ce'u ce'u¹) VAU>}])
03:51 < zipcpi> Oops forgot to replace the ce'us :p
03:57 < zipcpi> exp: sei broda tu'e brode .i brodi tu'u
03:57 < mensi> ([sei broda SEhU] [tu'e {<CU (¹brode VAU¹)> <i (¹CU [brodi VAU]¹)>} tu'u])
04:15 < gleki> translation challenge: She sent her son for a doctor.
04:15 < zipcpi> "sent"
04:15 < zipcpi> Hm...
04:15 < zipcpi> What sense is used here...
04:16 < gleki> it's more about "for"
04:16 < zipcpi> Yeah but I assume it's not "send to a doctor"?
04:16 < gleki> en: dispatch
04:16 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
04:16 < zipcpi> send for: order or instruct (someone) to come to one; summon.
04:16 < gleki> To dispatch an agent or messenger to convey a message, or to do an errand. 
04:17  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
04:17 < zipcpi> I think "summon" might be the desired sense
04:17 < zipcpi> Hm {klami'e} might be too specific though
04:17 < zipcpi> There's also {klacpe} but I'm not sure that's right either
04:18 < gleki> dirce zo'o
04:21 < zipcpi> Who do I submit the request to use the bo'V set to? I want it for "x1~x5"
04:22 < gleki> hm, framenet says "for" is non-core "purpose" case
04:22 < zipcpi> I think the meaning is something like "She asks for a doctor for her son"
04:23 < zipcpi> asks/summons
04:23 < gleki> i thought she literally made him go
04:24 < zipcpi> That would be "sent her son to a doctor"?
04:24 < gleki> no, "to a doctor for what?"
04:24 < zipcpi> "send for" is idiomatic
04:25 < gleki> https://framenet2.icsi.berkeley.edu/fnReports/data/lu/lu4491.xml?mode=annotation
04:26 < gleki> dont think so. i think it's "purpose" FE with raising
04:27 < zipcpi> Yeah, "send ko'a to ko'e for ko'i (abstraction)" means one thing, but "send ko'a for ko'i (noun)" means another; I think this is one of many, many ways that English doesn't match Lojban in regularity :p
04:28 < gleki> i transalted as {te zu'e tu'a}
04:29 < zipcpi> I understand what you're trying to say; I just think the English actually means something else, due to a malrarbau idiom :p
04:31 < gleki> no idea
04:31 < zipcpi> uesai The grammarians haven't touched your "google" sentence yet
04:31 < gleki> havent found yet probably
04:31 < zipcpi> Ironically it may be your Lojban sentence that's considered informal, since I literally just rewrote the definition of {gugle} today, while Curtis' original def was downvoted.
04:32 < zipcpi> Well, yesterday actually
04:39 < gleki> en: gugle
04:39 < mensi> gugle = x1 searches for x2 using search engine x3 |>>> See sisku, guglsisku |>>>
04:39 < mensi> spheniscine
04:40 < gleki> for me it's just "x1 googles x2"
04:40 < zipcpi> Well, te gugle = la gugle is somewhat implied :p
04:41 < zipcpi> Maybe it's better to have a word for "search engine" in general though
04:41 < zipcpi> That isn't so... trademark-clashing
04:42 < zipcpi> mi gugle da la .bing. iau zo'o
04:42 < zipcpi> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYVCk10AzS0
04:46 < zipcpi> ko gugle fi la .bing.
04:47 < fushgrhfhxdz> pehipei zoi zoi bing zoi jbovla
04:47 < fushgrhfhxdz> zo bin dramau
04:48 < zipcpi> xy'y mi na nelci
04:48 < mensi> ji'a mi mutce nelci i ie
04:50 < zipcpi> su'oroi nitcu lo nu ficygau zo'oi /n/ zo'oi /ŋ/ .iku'i ro re xai cu se sinxa me'o ny
04:50 < fushgrhfhxdz> ikuhi meho gy na mapti
04:52 < omni___> coi
04:53 < omni___> .i mi .omni lo ka rinsa kei lo ka .irci lo me dei moi je na me mi
04:53 < gleki> i mi'a casnu lo jufra pe la mupli
04:54 < zipcpi> na'o ku me'o ny cu to'ai ba'urtadji zo'oi /ŋ/ .ijo lo nu le go'i cu li'erla'i me'o gy ja me'o ky ja me'o xy
04:54 < omni___> lo sance be zoi zoi gy. bing .gy noi glico na se pagbu lo gy zei sance
04:54 < omni___> .i ku'i .a'u cu'i
04:55 < omni___> s/zoi zoi/zoi
04:55 < fenki> omni___ meant to say: lo sance be zoi gy. bing .gy noi glico na se pagbu lo gy zei sance
04:55 < Ilmen> za'a ca ti la cnino tankoi cu traji zvajbi la .pluton.
04:55 < Ilmen> s/za'a/ti'e
04:55 < fenki> Ilmen meant to say: ti'e ca ti la cnino tankoi cu traji zvajbi la .pluton.
04:55 < zipcpi> a'u
04:55 < omni___> .ei la fenki cu cusku lu ko'a pu skudji li'u je nai lo glico
04:56 < Ilmen> mi catlu lo vifne pixra pe la .pluton. u'e
04:56 < gleki> ei la su'o da cu cikre la fenki
04:56 < zipcpi> http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33524589
04:56 < zipcpi> u'e
04:56 < gleki> i ai mi ji'a catlu
04:57 < zipcpi> ca co'a djuno tu'a le skari
04:58 < Ilmen> ĭe
04:59 < gleki> i oinai la pluton cu simsa lo bicyladru
04:59 < gleki> i kukte ba'a
04:59 < gleki> sa'ai bisyladru le'ai
04:59 < zipcpi> u'i
05:00 < omni___> doi la zipcpi .i xu do sanji tu'a lo mi sidbo pe lu .a'y zei sance li'u
05:01 < zipcpi> mi pu pensi lo du ka'e makau lo bifce se ladru
05:01 < zipcpi> doi omni .i la'a naku
05:01 < omni___> .i mu'i lo nu cafne joi lo nu clani cu stidi lo du'u zo .asna fa'u zo .esna fa'u zo .isna fa'u zo .osna fa'u zo .usna ka'e basti .i ku'i ui nai zo .asna xa'o zasti
05:01 < omni___> .i lo ka .esna cu ka .e'y zei sance
05:01 < omni___> .i plixau lo bangu casnu
05:02 < zipcpi> je'e
05:02 < omni___> .i mi pu kanpe fi li su'o fe lo nu do na to'e se cinri
05:02 < gleki> zo asna zasti i ku'i lo nu pilno enai tu'a lo sepli remna cu rinka
05:02 < gleki> exp: mi enai tu'a mi cu mo
05:02 < mensi> ([mi {e nai} {tu'a mi LUhU}] [cu {mo VAU}])
05:04 < gleki> i ua zo vanlamigu pa da co'a se tunba
05:04 < zipcpi> ma tunba
05:04 < gleki> lo clani valsi
05:04 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/mardurudra
05:05 < zipcpi> simsa lo itku'ile iau pe'i
05:05 < omni___> .i ku'i na srana
05:05 < durka42> xu la .lyndyn. ta'e se tcima lo marduradra
05:05 < zipcpi> u'i
05:06 < omni___> mi senpi
05:12 < omni___> .i mi se mansa lo se cuxna be mi
05:12 < omni___> .i pu ze'u troci lo ka jdice
05:14 < omni___> .i za'a doi la gleki do finti la .itku'ile sutysisku .i .ai mi cupra lo gredile pe lo valstani
05:15 < omni___> .i ku'i barda .i .au lo drata .itku'ilpre mi sidju
05:16 < gleki> ie i mi na ba sidju
05:16 < omni___> .u'i
05:16 < gleki> i ta'o la mupli
05:20 < gleki> lai cnino korbi ca cliva la pluton to ju'oi http://whereispluto.info/en toi
05:21 < durka42> ua .i xu lo se kacma cu tsuku lo terdi
05:22 < zipcpi> je'u // http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-33524589
05:22 < durka42> ki'e
05:23 < Ilmen> .u'a dai
05:24 < zipcpi> Hey durka I'm taking bo'V; all five of them
05:24 < durka42> lol what for
05:24 < zipcpi> For "x1 - x5"
05:24 < durka42> ta'o lo cecmu cu cuxna
05:25 < durka42> zipcpi: https://xkcd.com/927/
05:25 < zipcpi> Well I think it's kinda long past due lol
05:25 < durka42> don't we have enough notations for those
05:25 < durka42> I thought we were waiting for something really important to use the bo'V series
05:25 < zipcpi> The problem is that they are all based on lerfu-anaphora
05:25 < durka42> (just playing devil's advocate)
05:26 < zipcpi> Which has the {boi} problem, and which selpa'i wants to replace (I'm kinda skeptical of an adequate replacement though; at the very least I like them for {goi})
05:27 < gleki> for x1 - x5 we have FA bu
05:27 < durka42> heh, it dosn't have the {boi} problem with xornunspo
05:27 < zipcpi> Yes that is the set I like the best, but ...
05:28 < zipcpi> FA bu does have the boi problem :p
05:28 < zipcpi> Even though I prefer it to xy xi pa
05:28 < durka42> the {boi} thing is rarely a problem
05:28 < zipcpi> Except in definitions lol
05:28 < durka42> only when you're defining one broda in terms of another and really "forwarding" all the xN in order
05:29 < gleki> i wanted full period to be expressed via {i bu} from {.i} but ... that already has another meaning which is a nice illustration of this {bu} problem
05:29 < zipcpi> Yes... which is even more complicated with the CKTJ reassignment of {zo'u} to {.u} :p
05:31 < zipcpi> What's more I just defined {cei'e} (selma'o SEI) to make it easier to define new words (probably involving zai'e) within a text
05:31 < gleki> maybe {... bu} should be explicitly made lo sumka'i but not letterals[3~[3~[3~
05:31 < zipcpi> So yeah, gonna need the x1-x5 things for that
05:32 < durka42> you can use {zo i bu}
05:32 < durka42> camxes: zo.ibu
05:32 < camxes> ([{<zo i> bu} BOI] VAU)
05:32 < omni___> Five cmavo just so you can talk more easily about Lojban grammar. People aren't crazy when they complain that Lojban is only used to talk about Lojban...
05:32 < zipcpi> u'i
05:32 < durka42> ie
05:33 < durka42> ta'o I fell off my xkcd translations during kibjasyselkei and I have to get back on that
05:33 < durka42> .o'anaise'i
05:35 < zipcpi> OK it doesn't like me adding "x3" as a keyword for some reason, even though it accepted "x1" and "x2"
05:35 < omni___> pe'i {bu} is not a solution for anything permanent, like the names of keys or specific characters of an alphabet. {bu} is ad-hoc, and ambiguous between referring to a letter or a thing starting with that letter. I much prefer making brivla.
05:35 < zipcpi> I think me'o refers to the letters or letter-strings
05:36 < omni___> {bu} is not compositional, so it's bad Lojban
05:36 < zipcpi> Or {li'ei} post xornunspo :p
05:36 < omni___> cmavo compounds should not have irregular meanings
05:36 < omni___> nor should brivla + cmavo
05:36 < zipcpi> The problem is how do you spell out, say, a URL?
05:36 < omni___> broda bu is super irregular
05:36 < zipcpi> Not sure brivla helps with that
05:37 < omni___> denpa bu is such an ugly term.
05:37 < b_jonas> ienai doi omni___. I think {bu} is a special case, because {bu} compounds are similar to lujvo, they're words that should go to a dictionary
05:38 < b_jonas> omni___: {bu} compounds and {zei} compounds shall both get permanent meanings, and not reused in incompatible ways
05:39 < omni___> Sure, that's an option.
05:39 < gleki> {denpa bu} is fine provided it never refers to {lo denpa}
05:39 < durka42> exactly, that's the problem ^
05:39 < gleki> i already removed all letteral anaphora from la bangu
05:39 < durka42> then {mlatu bu} can never refer to {lo mlatu}
05:40 < durka42> only ^_^
05:40 < gleki> similarly {a bu} is "a" as an object (e.g. letter as text)
05:41 < omni___> {.abu} can refer to Alice, and also to the letter A, or anything else.
05:41 < omni___> So can any BY.
05:41 < gleki> y mi stidi lo nu co'u co'e
05:41 < durka42> the letter is {me'o .abu}
05:41 < durka42> but yes
05:42 < ctefa`o> Hey guys. Related to my question yesterday, how many find it hard to distinguish [baw] vs [baʊ]?
05:43 < durka42> in english, would that be the sound difference between "caw" (the sound a crow makes) and "cow" (the animal)?
05:43 < zipcpi> No
05:43 < omni___> Not *that* easy, but doable. However the difference quickly disappears in fast speech, especially if another [w] follows
05:43 < ctefa`o> Not sure about english counterparts
05:43 < durka42> hmm
05:43 < durka42> if you can transliterate into english or spanish, I can tell you :)
05:44 < omni___> Distinguishing /bawa/ from /bauwa/ is hard in fast speech.
05:45 < durka42> {ba ua} / {bau ua} ?
05:45 < zipcpi> {bau ua} technically needs a pause
05:45 < durka42> that's why I wrote it without one
05:45 < durka42> I was asking if it's the same equivalence
05:45 < durka42> I should just stay out of IPA discussions
05:47 < ctefa`o> doi gleki your opinion?
05:47 < durka42> <gleki> in la alta you can use ' to avoid the problem
05:47 < durka42> zo'osai
05:49  * nuzba @slaimsan: lo tutra xatra     cu sutra matra     lo gutra catra    #lojban [http://bit.ly/1O3yrNx]
05:50 < gleki> my opinion that {v} should be banned :D
05:50 < gleki> too close to [w]
05:51 < zipcpi> u'i
05:51 < durka42> .u'i
05:51 < ctefa`o> wu'i
05:58 < omni___> Here is the prototype of the ithkuil dictionary spreadsheet. Any complaints before I fill in the rest?
05:58 < omni___> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UFwAZz-PpCZ6t5jU0wCd5TR2LgskBNInlEpKiktYCoQ/edit?usp=sharing
06:00 < gleki> + most obvious example
06:01 < gleki> for roots each P/S combination should have its own explanation
06:01 < gleki> +examples too
06:01  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
06:01 < gleki> roots should also link to series they belong tooo (i.e. P/S patterning)
06:01 < gleki> *belong to
06:01  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
06:01 < omni___> mi xa'o gasnu
06:01 < omni___> .i ko catlu
06:03 < gleki> mi na zgana
06:03 < gleki> i do cusku zo'ei ma
06:03 < gleki> i lo mupli xu
06:03 < gleki> i xu lo me'oi root
06:03 < omni___> "roots should also link to series they belong tooo (i.e. P/S patterning) "
06:04 < gleki> mi na zgana lo me'oi root
06:06 < gleki> i ca ti ki'e
06:07 < omni___> je'e .i ku'i lo mupli zo'u ka'e jmina ca lo drata
06:07 < omni___> .i mi na .aidji
06:07 < gleki> lo mupli pe lo me'oi root zo'u ca ti i'a
06:07 < omni___> .i dukse lo ka fanza fa lo ka finti
06:08 < zipcpi> exp: tu'e broda .i brode tu'u sei brodi
06:08 < gleki> i ku'i lo mupli pe lo me'oi case zo'u e'u lo formative cu jorne lo me'oi case ji'a
06:08 < mensi> (tu'e [{CU <broda VAU>} {i <CU (¹brode VAU¹)>}] tu'u [sei brodi SEhU])
06:08 < b_jonas> omni___: "{.abu} can refer to Alice, and also to the letter A, or anything else." -- no no no now you're mixing it up, that's just as true for {ly.}. {me'o .a bu} refers to the letter A, {.a bu} alone as a sumti is a pro-sumti with no fixed meaning and almost certainly doesn't refer to the letter A itself,
06:09 < gleki> actually it was discussed just recently
06:09 < b_jonas> and {li .a bu} is a also variable that has no fixed meanign and could refer to a different thing each time, only it's used in mekso context.
06:09 < b_jonas> omni___: but the same is true for {me'o ly.} and {ly.} respectively
06:09 < gleki> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/F_bOJaX-SuA/discussion
06:09 < gleki> .title
06:09 < fenki> [ Google Groups ]
06:10 < b_jonas> omni___: now if you say that {me'o .a bu} is a bad name for the letter "A" and we should use {a'y} instead, that's a position I can sort of understand though I don't really agree, and even then, I still think {bu} is useful for at least some things like this.
06:10 < b_jonas> because even if the letter "A" is so common or {.a bu} in particular is a bad name, {bu} has lots of other good uses
06:19 < zipcpi> I prefer {pi bu} for dot, but that might be mabla ma'i lo'e ropno :p
06:21 < b_jonas> what? {pi bu}? why not just {pi}
06:21 < b_jonas> isn't {pi} the dot?
06:22 < zipcpi> pi is not BY, it's PA
06:22 < zipcpi> Oh
06:23 < zipcpi> Within {me'o}
06:23 < zipcpi> Well that kinda depends on whether you're talking post xornunsep or not, but... *shrugs*
06:23 < b_jonas> zipcpi: yes, the grammar differs a bit
06:24 < zipcpi> Still though I feel kinda weird going {me'o gy obu obu gy ly ebu *pi* cy obu my}
06:24 < b_jonas> but if you're reading out something, {pi} could be fine for a dot, the only problem is that some people may think it's a comma
06:24 < zipcpi> Yeah
06:24 < b_jonas> which is why it may be better to use {denpa bu} if you want dot ambiguously
06:25 < zipcpi> The problem is I think of {denpa bu} as space, but, definitions are definitions...
06:25 < zipcpi> Think space is typically {kunti bu}? Don't think that's defined though
06:28 < zipcpi> But yeah I'm not fond of what xornunsep does to LI...LOhO. I invented {li'ei} just to protest it
06:28 < zipcpi> Though it has four votes now o.o
06:29 < gleki> i proposed several words for dot. but two jbopre  were against
06:29 < gleki> so i changed back to {denpa bu}
06:29 < zipcpi> Was {pibu} one of them?
06:30 < gleki> no
06:30 < gleki> now try you :)
06:30 < zipcpi> Haha
06:30 < gleki> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/hEEu_l9TxJw/discussion
06:31 < zipcpi> .latex. bu zo'o
06:32 < zipcpi> lu sumti bu li'u noi krasi li'ai py xy.bu py
06:32 < zipcpi> .y. se krasi
06:33 < zipcpi> merko bu zo'o
06:37 <@xalbo> zipcpi: The problem with {pibu} is that a lot of cultures use ⟨.⟩ as a thousands separator, and ⟨,⟩ as the decimal separator.
06:38 < zipcpi> I know... that's why I said it might be mabla fi lo'e ropno :p
06:38 < zipcpi> But come on... denpa bu... x.x
06:39 < gleki> {pi bu} is fine. it's just that its spelling varies across localizations
06:55 < zipcpi> One of my little zbusufukai eccentricities is using the tilde rather than the hyphen for {bi'i} in English texts
06:55 < zipcpi> Because mabla
06:56 < zipcpi> mabla lo ka smuvrici
07:00 < gleki> anyone can provide me with the postgres db of JVS?
07:05  * cliva ku ji'a se cinri tau le sorcu
07:34 < zipcpi> Guess gleki really didn't like {gugle fi la .bing.} :p
07:36 < zipcpi> I mean, maybe a trademark is hard to argue for gimy'inda. It's already used a lot though lol
07:37 < omni___> mi se mansa zo gugylsisku
07:45 < gleki> not really. i cant be serious with this proposal
07:45 < gleki> it's an ad hoc gismu
07:45 < zipcpi> Yeah
07:45 < gleki> en: guglbon
07:46 < gleki> vlaste: guglbon
07:46 < vlaste> guglbon = Google Wave
07:46 < mensi> guglbon = Google Wave |>>> sarefo
07:46 < gleki> how many people remember?
07:47 < omni___> Google Bone
07:47 < zipcpi> Which is also why I didn't take Curtis' suggestion for the rafsi -gul-
07:47 < omni___> coi la niftagi
07:47 < zipcpi> Even though I'm pretty bad with abusing experimental rafsi :p
07:47 < niftg> coi omni jo'u me ro do
07:48 < omni___> I wonder what it would be like if selckiku was here.
07:48 < zipcpi> I still don't know what his glotu or whatever mean
07:48 < omni___> Then you could make experimental rafsi together
07:49 < omni___> selckiku would approve of mardurudra!
07:49 < zipcpi> u'i
07:50 < zipcpi> mi morji tau la guglyboxna .iku'i mi noroi pilno
07:50 < zipcpi> zo guglyzambo'a u'i
07:51 < omni___> zamboni
07:51 < gleki> la gugle boxna cu mabla
07:51 < omni___> la .gugyl. boxna cu mabla
07:55 < omni___> en:menstruate
07:56 < omni___> za'a zo gutrypilcri
07:57 < gleki> LIVLABOT: "lujvo:" command now outputs only lujvo but not cmevla
07:57 < gleki> lujvo: klama gasnu
07:57 < mensi> klagau[5847], klagasnu[7917], klamygau[7977], klamygasnu[10047]
07:57 < mensi> klagau [< klama gasnu ≈ Come(s) do] = x1 brings x2 to x3
07:58 < omni___> xamgu
07:59 < gleki> na djuno
08:00 < gleki> i mi su'oroi nitcu lo jvocmevla
08:00 < zipcpi> jvocmevo: klama gasnu
08:00 < zipcpi> da'i
08:34 < niftg> .ua la zantufa ji'a ca'o zvati
08:45 < zipcpi> zantufa: do mo
08:45 < zantufa> (do CU [mo VAU])
08:48 < omni___> zantufa: .abu za'u re'u broda
08:48 < zantufa> ([{a bu} BOI] CU [{za'u re'u} broda] VAU)
08:48 < zipcpi> exp: me'olo'o
08:48 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "e" found.
08:48 < zipcpi> Huh maybe that's what Curtis' {zai'e} was for
08:49 < zipcpi> Then again though, I don't see why that has to break
08:50 < zipcpi> Also no idea what his selma'o is for lol
08:50 < zipcpi> XOhEhOhE
08:51 < niftg> zantufa: jo'au zantufa xipire .i domo
08:51 < zantufa> ([jo'au {zantufa <xi (¹pi re¹) BOI>} DOhU] [i {do CU <mo VAU>}])
08:52 < niftg> zantufa: jo'au zantufa xipire .i fajefedomo
08:52 < zantufa> ([jo'au {zantufa <xi (¹pi re¹) BOI>} DOhU] [i {<fa (¹je fe¹)> do} CU {mo VAU}])
08:52 < niftg> .uo
08:52 < ldlework> coi ny
08:53 < niftg> zantufa: jo'au zantufa xipipabi .i fajefedomo
08:53 < zantufa> ([jo'au {zantufa <xi (¹pi pa bi¹) BOI>} DOhU] [i {<fa (¹je fe¹)> do} CU {mo VAU}])
08:53 < niftg> .uonai
08:53 < niftg> coi cadgu'a
08:53 < zipcpi> e'u ko cipygau tu'a lu <jo'aunai> li'u
08:53 < niftg> .u'i zo'o dai
08:54 < zipcpi> ku'i mi ja'a jmina ri la jbovlaste
08:54 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/jo'aunai
08:54 < niftg> .u'e
08:55 < niftg> jbo:jo'aunai
08:55 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
08:55 < niftg> en:jo'aunai
08:55 < mensi> jo'aunai = [COI*3] denial of dialect
08:55 < niftg> je'e .i jo'au noda
08:55 < zipcpi> u'i
08:55 < niftg> sa'e jo'au papo'oda
08:56 < zipcpi> jo'au na'e co'e
08:56 < zipcpi> ei mi cliva co'o
08:57 < niftg> co'oi
08:59 < niftg> .ai lunbe lumci vo'a gi'e surgau lo vo'a skami co'o
08:59 < gleki> zantufa: mi broda noi mo
08:59 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
08:59 < gleki> ue
09:00 < niftg> gau ko xagze'a stika
09:05 < gleki> exp: mi broda noi
09:05 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] but "i" found.
09:13  * xalbo suspects it would be possible to make the error messages from mensi less useful, but isn't sure how.
09:15 < gleki> less or more?
09:15 < gleki> if more then i linked today to a new tracing option in peg.js
09:15 < gleki> but i couldnt run the master version of it
09:15 < clakre> less, it's a joke
09:15 < clakre> that's the jocular way in english to say "the messages aren't very useful, in fact they could hardly be less useful"
09:16 < gleki> translation challenge: "to pluck a fruit (~=to tear away)"
09:16 < gleki> vimcu?
09:16 < gleki> lebna?
09:16 < gleki> definitely not degycpu
09:17 < e`ogan> Shouldn't it depend on what author means though?
09:18 < gleki> I plucked a fruit from the tree.Eve plucked fruit from the tree of knowledge.
09:20 < gleki> alta: mi klama noi cizra noi se kanpe
09:20 < mensi> (I [FA ZOhE] [CU {FASNU <FA (¹LO [NU {<FA mi> <CU (²klama NF²) VAU>} KEI] KU¹) (¹noi [{FA ZOhE} {CU <FASNU (²FA [LO {NU <(³FA ZOhE³) (³CU [cizra NF] VAU³)> KEI} KU] [noi {<FA ZOhE> <CU (³se
09:20 < mensi> [kanpe NF]³) VAU>} KUhO]²) VAU>}] KUhO¹)> VAU}])
09:22 < gleki> double NOI is impossible then
09:22 <@xalbo> Maybe something with {lacpu}. {lebna} is definitely useful. Depends on whether you want to emphasize it no longer being attached, or gaining it by removal, or something.
09:22 < gleki> i wonder how soi was meant to work if it operates on main level.
09:22 <@xalbo> Oh, duh: {crepu}.
09:23 < gleki> xalbo: degycpu and lacpu doesnt express the notion of tearing away. rather {snada lo ka lacpu}?
09:23 <@xalbo> {crepu} is the answer for most purposes, I think.
09:23 < gleki> ki'e
09:25 < gleki> that's definitely something backlinks in gimste missed
09:26 < gleki> there is also
09:26 < gleki> en: ampute
09:26 < mensi> ampute = x1 amputates, surgically removes x2 from x3 leaving remainder x4 |>>> See also vimcu, katna |>>>
09:26 < mensi> gleki
09:26 < gleki> but that's cheating
09:27 < omni___> xu do .ampute lo plise lo tricu
09:27 < gleki> ie i sepi'o lo dakfu
09:27 < gleki> i xu do na morji doi la fanza najnimre
09:27 < gleki> sa
09:27 < gleki> i xu do na vedli doi la fanza najnimre
09:27 < gleki> i ro ma'a pu se ampute
09:28 < gleki> exp: mi klama soi mo soi mo
09:28 < gleki> soi mo
09:28 < gleki> doi la mensi
09:28 < mensi> (mi [CU {klama <soi (¹CU [mo {soi <CU (²mo VAU²)> SEhU} VAU]¹) SEhU> VAU}])
09:29 < gleki> omni___: xu do tugni lo cipra gerna
09:29 < omni___> gi'i
09:29 < omni___> go'i
09:30 < gleki> i ba'a zo soi damba lo sko'opu gi'enai damba lo nu lo bridi cu nenri
09:30 < gleki> vau iepei
09:30 < mensi> mi tugni i ie mi tugni
09:30 < gleki> jb: crepu
09:30 < mensi> crepu = crepu — x1(entity)  harvests  x2(property of x3)  from  x3(entity)
09:30 < mensi> :lo crepu — harvester. lo se crepu — harvested crop. lo te crepu — crop field.
09:30 < mensi> :ra crepu lo vanjba lo purdi — She is harvesting grapes from the garden.
09:30 < mensi> :Related words: lebna, vimcu, latna, critu, sombo, jmaji
09:30 < gleki> *katna
09:47 < gleki> https://github.com/guskant/gerna_cipra/blob/master/minajimpe.sh
09:59  * nuzba @graywyvern: ba'o klama le plini nomoi ka'ucu'i #pluto #lojban [http://bit.ly/1UYYElE]
09:59 < gleki> xu no moi
10:00 < gleki> i pe'i na go'i
10:00 < gleki> i la tcerera cu plini ji'a
10:00 < gleki> vau mu'a
10:00 < gleki> jb: plini
10:00 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
10:00 < gleki> je'e
10:00 < gleki> en: plini
10:00 < mensi> plini = x1 is a planet revolving around x2 with planetary characteristics x3, orbital parameters x4. |>>> See also lunra,
10:00 < mensi> mluni, terdi, solri, munje. |>>> officialdata
10:01 < gleki> i think we should add "a planet/dwarf planet"
10:12 < gleki> alta: noi
10:12 < mensi> (I [FA ZOhE] [CU {FASNU <FA (¹LO [NU {<FA ZOhE> <CU (²COhE VAU²)>} KEI] KU¹) (¹noi [{FA ZOhE} {CU <COhE VAU>}] KUhO¹)> VAU}])
10:12 < gleki> the complexity increases
10:13 < gleki> soon a single "alta: le" will output the whole explanation of xorlo + all kurtyvla explained as a bonus.
10:28 <@xalbo> soon, "alta: le" will explain the current state and history of {le}, in automatically generated Ithkuil, and will also emit an autodidact to teach Ithkuil, no matter what languages you already know.
10:31 < gleki> hm, in pictures then
10:31 < gleki> btw can we both have {astro} and {astra}?
10:32 < b_jonas> gleki: no
10:32 < b_jonas> oh wait
10:32 < b_jonas> sure, you can have both
10:32 < b_jonas> those aren't gismu
10:32 < b_jonas> but it could be confusing of course
10:32 < gleki> berbere, berberi ...
10:35 < omni___> xalbo: .u'i
10:36 <@xalbo> berbera'a'a'a'a'a
10:39 < gleki> en: astro
10:39 < mensi> astro = x1 is a celestial body, heavenly body |>>> plini describes planets (lo planeta), dwarf planets (lo jdikyplini),
10:39 < mensi> asteroids (lo cmaplini). See also kensa, tarci, solri. |>>> gleki
10:41 < b_jonas> i fo'i jubme gi'e ka'e zu'e galfi lo ka fo'i galtu .i bu'u lo bemro so'i xu briju cu stuzi su'o fo'i
10:41 <@xalbo> astro = x1 is a rhotic space dog of breed x2. See also skubi.
10:45 < gleki> i think next i will concentrate on Tatoeba. issues with altatufa dont seem to be very interesting to me
10:48  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
12:15 < gleki> xalbo: it was asked here about "once a week". in zipcip's datetime system it'd be {de'i ro li jy} with possibly {xo'e} at the end
12:17 <@xalbo> I like {di'i/di'inai lo jeftu}, but I think others strongly disagree with that for {di'i} as sumtcita.
12:17 <@xalbo> ({di'i lo jeftu} being "regularly, with intervals of one week", and {di'inai lo jeftu} being "irregularly, but roughly once a week")
12:19 < gleki> how it can solve the problem of intersecting intervals
12:21 <@xalbo> Under my theory, {di'i} as sumtcita takes as its argument a single event (or something with spacetime duration), and uses that as the interval. So, since all weeks are of the same length, it doesn't matter which week-long-thing we use as {lo jeftu}.
12:23 <@xalbo> {lo jeftu [be li pa [be'o]]} is any week-long thing, so {di'i lo jeftu [be li pa [be'o]]} is "at regular intervals, each of them being the same duration in time as {lo jeftu [be li pa [be'o]]}".
12:23 < gleki> no i mean if a 7 day interval intersects with another one at ppoin 3.5 days then even when taken together they will form regular intervals of 3.5 days
12:25 < gleki> each of them forms intervals of 7 days but the sum function can turn that into 3.5 days and so on
12:25 <@xalbo> I don't understand. My {di'i} more or less throws out its argument, or rather, it evaluates it only for its duration.
12:25 <@xalbo> Where is this sum function being added?
12:26 < gleki> two sets of 7 day intervals intersect in sum forming a 3.5 interval since the second set of 7 day intervals is shifted 3.5 days compared to the first one.
12:27 <@xalbo> But we're not intersecting them. We're only evaluation them for their length, and they have the same length.
12:28 <@xalbo> {di'i lo nu la .linkn. jmive}: at regular intervals, each of which is the same length as the amount of time that Lincoln lived.
12:28 < gleki> yes, they all have the same length but nothing is said about their absolute coordinates. we know period but not phase.
12:28 <@xalbo> Yes. That's all {di'i} does is give you a period.
12:29 < gleki> it's jeftu2 that gives you period
12:29 <@xalbo> Oh, are you trying to say something like "once per calendar week"/"once in each period from Sunday-Saturday" (or wherever your week starts/ends)?
12:32 < gleki> one {jeftu li pa}period can start on monday 00:01am, another on wednesday 12:01pm. if they are sine functions then we have a perfect regular (di'i) pattern that however has the total period of 3.5
12:33  * gleki de'a jundi
12:34 <@xalbo> That's like saying that two dogs can kill each other, so {lo gerku} means the bloody remains of two dogs.
12:39 <@xalbo> I really think we're failing to understand each other. My point is entirely that {lo jeftu be li pa} is one thing that lasts one week. {broda di'i ko'a} says "how long is {ko'a}? Well, broda happens once per that amount of time."
12:41 <@xalbo> {ko'a} could be {lo jeftu be li pa} or it could be {lo temci be lo nu do jbena bei lo nu lo remna cu zvati le lunra}, or it could be the length of a Presidential term, or anything else that has a spacetime duration.
12:41 < b_jonas> xalbo: sure. so {ze'a lo pa jeftu} means it lasts for one week long, and {ca ro jeftu} means once every week?
12:43 < b_jonas> xalbo: or {ca ro jeftu fi'o se rapli li pa} if you want to be really clear
12:43 <@xalbo> {ca ro jeftu} can be problematic, because there we're taking the weeklong things and treating them as locations in time, instead of durations.
12:43 < b_jonas> = on every week, repeated once
12:43 < b_jonas> xalbo: meh, {ca ro ko'a fi'o se rapli li pa} and you started that
12:43 <@xalbo> {fi'o se rapli li pa} is pretty much {pa roi}, I think.
12:44 < b_jonas> if you don't want to use {lo pa jeftu}, fine, whatever
12:44 < b_jonas> xalbo: yes, it's the same
12:44 < b_jonas> xalbo: I just don't like {roi} and {re'u}
12:44 < b_jonas> so I use {fi'o se rapli} and {fi'o te krefu} instead
12:45 < b_jonas> feel free to say {pa roi} if you wish
12:46 <@xalbo> My problem with {ca ro jeftu} is one of pragmatism intersecting with literalism. That is, for things I do once a week, then unless I do it at the exact same moment each week, it's not true literally true.
12:48 <@xalbo> This week I did it at 8 am Monday. The next week, at 8:30 Monday morning. So there are infinitely many week-long intervals during which I didn't do it. (There's one starting at 8:01, there's another starting at 8:01:02, there's another starting at 8:01:02.334543, etc).
12:48 <@xalbo> My pragmatist says "So? It's close enough, just deal with it."
12:48 < b_jonas> xalbo: dunno, feel free to use something else then. but do you at least agree that {ze'a lo jeftu be li pa} means the event lasts for a week long?
12:49 <@xalbo> Yes. That I'll absolutely agree with.
12:52 < b_jonas> xalbo: um, what if you try to figure out a way to say “calendar week” ({detcmenyciste jeftu} or something)? would that help so then you could say {ca ro detcmenyciste jeftu fi'o se rapli li pa}?
12:52 < b_jonas> as in, once every calendar week, which means a week long interval starting at some fixed day of the week and at a fixed time of the week
12:53 < b_jonas> eg. Monday midnight in some cultures
12:53 <@xalbo> Yeah, that might be what I'd want.
12:58  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
13:19 < b_jonas> xalbo: ok, figure out something better than {detcmenyciste} then because that's horrible
13:20 <@xalbo> veldetri?
13:20 <@xalbo> A veldetri is a system by which numbers are assigned to days. Doesn't seem terribly wrong.
13:24 < b_jonas> xalbo: yes, that could work
13:25 < b_jonas> for calendar at least
13:25 < b_jonas> but I'm not sure if {veldetri jeftu} is a good way to say calendar week
13:25 < b_jonas> it might be
14:08 < Ilmen> coi
14:08 < omni___> coi
14:09 < Ilmen> Do you think that {na ka'e broda} ≠ {ka'e nai broda}? My recollection seems to imply so.
14:11 < omni___> Absolutely.
14:11 <@xalbo> My gut reaction is to simultaneously think they sound really similar, and that there's probably some subtlety I'm overlooking.
14:11 < omni___> I say this all the time
14:11 < omni___> I always tell people that "ka'e nai" is always wrong
14:12 <@xalbo> Oh, now I remember: *{ka'e nai} is a parsefail under the official grammar.
14:13 < omni___> {ka'e nai} is self-contradicting.
14:13 <@xalbo> How so?
14:14 < omni___> Like any {TAG nai}, {ka'e nai broda} expands as {lo su'u broda cu fasnu gi'e na cumki}.
14:14 < omni___> Compare with {ca nai broda} -> {lo su'u broda cu fasnu gi'e na cabna}
14:14 < Ilmen> Should I deduce that {ka'e broda} = {lo su'u broda cu fasnu gi'e cumki}?
14:15 <@xalbo> omni___: So are you saying that {ka'e} expands to include a {fasnu}‽
14:16 < Ilmen> Or is it just that {TAG nai} expands differently to a regular TAG?
14:16 <@xalbo> (Viddy well, my little droogies: this is why unifying all your tags together can be taken too far.)
14:16 < Ilmen> s/to/from
14:16 < fenki> Ilmen meant to say: Or is it just that {TAG nai} expands differently from a regular TAG?
14:17 < Ilmen> So {TAG nai} would always be incidental to the main claim. ie pei
14:17 < mensi> ba'e mi na tugni
14:19 < omni___> Weird... of course {ka'e broda} does not assert {broda}.
14:19 < Ilmen> Whereas {TAG ja'ai} may change the main bridi's realisness, depending on the predicate underlying this tag.
14:19 < Ilmen> (If I follow correctly)
14:21 < omni___> Hm...
14:21 < omni___> {broda fi'o na se cumki}
14:21 < Ilmen> ka'e broda ---> broda xoi cumki ---> lo nu broda cu cumki   ||   ka'enai broda  ---> broda sei cumki  ---> broda .i lo nu go'i cu cumki
14:22 < omni___> Clearly CAhA doesn't work like that
14:22 < Ilmen> .i cizra ku'i
14:22 < omni___> Doesn't broda xoi cumki assert broda?
14:22 < Ilmen> *broda sei na cumki
14:23 <@xalbo> I treat {ko'a ka'e broda} as {ko'a se jinzi lo ka kakne lo ka broda}, roughly.
14:23 < omni___> x1 centered tags?
14:24 < omni___> To me it's just {lo nu broda cu cumki}
14:24 <@xalbo> Not really. It's harder to paraphrase {ko'a ko'e ka'e broda}, but it should have the same relationship. The property of being able to be in a broda relationship is inherent in the tuple.
14:24 < Ilmen> I want xoi to be able to change the bridi's realisness, so that xoi can be used to describe/replace any of the current tag word
14:25 < Ilmen> So that ka'e = xoi cumki (vau)
14:25 < Ilmen> If one wants to make an incidental claim, there's always {sei}, for example
14:25 <@xalbo> Actually, for me it's more "{ko'a ko'e broda} doesn't fail a compile time type check. {ko'a} and {ko'e} are the sorts of things that can {broda} each other."
14:26 < Ilmen> .i'e nai pei
14:26 <@xalbo> la mensi ku la'a na tugni
14:26 <@xalbo> si zanru
14:26 < omni___> Ilmen: Well I understand why you might want that. I've always treated {xoi} as bridi-{je}.
14:27 < omni___> {broda xoi purci} -> broda happens and is in the past
14:28 < omni___> In your model, don't we lose the broda assertion?
14:28 < Ilmen> It would be weird to claim it's in the past of something that doesn't happen
14:28 < Ilmen> pei
14:28 < Ilmen> (in the currently considered world)
14:29 < omni___> broda xoi ke'a purci tu'a dei
14:29 < omni___> Is it really weird? {lo nu broda cu purci lo nu brode} makes sense for hypothetical events
14:30 < Ilmen> Yes, but then we're talking about an hypothetical world (even if that's not explicit)
14:30 < Ilmen> I guess Ithkuil handles better hypothetical situations marking
14:30 < omni___> But do you want to have to interpret the sentence before deciding if the bridi is asserted? Shouldn't it be algorithmic?
14:32 <@xalbo> Not really. I mean, I think the point is that the assertedness comes from the {purci} in that case.
14:33 < omni___> Don't we agree that {purci} and similar words don't automatically assert their abstractions?
14:33 < Ilmen> In the case of {lo nu broda cu purci lo nu brode} is true only if it is actually the case (in the currently considered world) that the events of brodaing are in the past of those of brodeing
14:34 < omni___> {lo nu do na jimpe cu mukti lo nu do retsku kei ko}. Asserted or not?
14:34 < omni___> xalbo's favorite.
14:34 < Ilmen> omni__: I'd say so; you assert that an event happened before another one, so it entails that they happened
14:35 < Ilmen> at least the speaker claims so
14:35 <@xalbo> xalbo almost always adds a {da'i} to that, for exactly that reason.
14:35 < omni___> I assert that one is before the other, but they might not happen
14:35 < Ilmen> Please show me an example, .e'o
14:35 < omni___> That's why {pu broda} is not {lo nu broda cu purci} but {lo nu broda cu fasnu gi'e purci}
14:37 < omni___> {purci} only talks about the order of two events, hypothetical or real.
14:37 < Ilmen> What do you mean with "they might not happen"? Happen in which world?
14:39 < Ilmen> Does {lo pavyseljirna pu pinxe bu'u lo rirxe} entails that in our perceivable physical world there was in the past an Unicorn drinking at a river?
14:39 < Ilmen> Couldn't it just be that it happens in an imaginary/hypotherical world?
14:39 < omni___> It doesn't matter. It's relative to the domain of discourse.
14:40 < Ilmen> Why does it doesn't matter for fasnu but matters for purci?
14:40 < omni___> Can you rephrase?
14:41 < Ilmen> Maybe I'm too tired for understanding that now
14:41 < Ilmen> .u'u
14:41 < Ilmen> s/doesn't/Ø
14:41 < fenki> Ilmen meant to say: Why does it Ø matter for fasnu but matters for purci?
14:42 < omni___> The point of {fasnu} is to assert that an event takes place. It is not the point of {purci} to assert that something takes place, but to specify the relative  order of two events.
14:42 < Ilmen> !q
14:42 < Ilmen> si
14:42 < omni___> Whether those two events are hypothetical or actually occur(ed) is not important to {purci}
14:43 < omni___> The general rule in Lojban is that subordinate bridi are not by default asserted.
14:43 < Ilmen> doens't temporal order implies time and thus implies a world, even if hypothetical?  ju'inai mi'e tatpi .u'i
14:44 < omni___> "My birth is before my marriage, that's for sure, although I might never marry"
14:44 < Ilmen> I would say that whether subordinate clause are asserted wholly depends on the predicate they're passed to
14:44 < Ilmen> Otherwise, {lo nu carvi cu fasnu} wouldn't assert "carvi"
14:45 < omni___> It takes specific brivla, as I said, like {fasnu} (or {jetnu} etc)
14:45 < omni___> They exist precisely to assert those subordinate clauses
14:47 < Ilmen> How to say {In our real world, clouds gather before rain, but in imaginary world X, rain precedes cloud gathering."?
14:48 < Ilmen> %)
14:50 < omni___> fatci fa lo nu lo dilnu cu jmaji pu lo nuncarvi .i ku'i xanri fa lo nu lo nuncarvi cu purci lo nu lo dilnu cu jmaji
14:52 < Ilmen> It doesn't keep the "X" part though (world naming). So "fatci" is definitely bound to our own real world?
14:52 < Ilmen> Well I have to meditate about all this.
14:53 < omni___> Referring to specific imaginary worlds isn't something I'm used to doing on a daily basis :)
14:53 < omni___> Except maybe for my novels
14:54 < omni___> I thought {zasti} had a fitting place, but it seems not
14:54 < Ilmen> Can be usefule though. "In the world of Harry Potter, people can fly riding brooms"
14:54 < omni___> Yes of course
14:54 < omni___> I didn't mean to say that it's rare to talk about imaginary worlds
14:55 < omni___> But it's always "the world of X", "the world where Y happens"
14:55 < omni___> ta'o do po'o nai tatpi
14:56 < Ilmen> I've long wondered whether {fasnu} doesn't lack an essential world slot. (Possibly filled by default with the real world, if deemed necessary)
14:56 < Ilmen> je'e
14:56 < Ilmen> Thank you for casting the light of a different opinion on this matter.
14:57 < Ilmen> ki'e jinvi cusku
14:57 < omni___> (mu'ei exists, but a brivla would be better)
14:57 < omni___> mi na djuno lo du'u xu kau zo munje drani
15:00 < omni___> ta'o nai lu ka'e nai li'u zo'u ki'u ma no da jungau mi lo du'u mi srera doi poi'i ke'a djuno lo du'u mi ca tavla ke'a
15:01 < omni___> .i .ai mi di'a gunka lo ka mulgau lo .itku'ile vlaste noi barda .oi .i ro .itku'ile gismu cu cupra pabi valstani .i je mi macnu ciska gi'e macnu fukpypu'i
15:01 < Ilmen> ni'o ba'a .a'u sai ca lo bavlamdei lo cnino pixra be la .pluton. cu gubni
15:01 < omni___> .a'u dai
15:01 < omni___> .i la .pluton. do cinri ma
15:01 < Ilmen> .i .oi dai di'ai gunka
15:02 < Ilmen> .i sa'u darno joi fange munje
15:02 < Ilmen> .i se manci
15:02 < omni___> do ma trajynei lo ma'a plini
15:03 < omni___> .i mi go'i la .iupiter. ze'u pu
15:03 < Ilmen> mi na mutce lo ka certu lo ka trajynei cuxna
15:03 < omni___> .u'i .i'a
15:03 < Ilmen> .i ba'a ma'a tugni fi tau la terdi
15:03 < Ilmen> :)
15:04 < omni___> do'a nai la terdi ma'a zdani
15:05 < Ilmen> ĭe ni'o .ai di'a ku la terdi cu bevri lo nu mi sipna co'o
15:05 < omni___> je'e .aidji be lo ka lo nu ce sipna cu se bevri la terdi
15:05 < omni___> .i .a'o surla ba
15:12 < Lojbeh> #jbosnu
16:18 < zipcpi> exp: goi'e si coi ko'a tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
16:18 < mensi> ([goi'e si] [coi ko'a DOhU] [tu'e {<CU (¹broda VAU¹)> <i (¹CU [brode VAU]¹)>} tu'u])
16:50 < zipcpi> Hmm... how about this for the lerfu anaphora problem, at least with the {goi} side:
16:51 < zipcpi> {ko'ai} (selma'o LI) pro-sumti variable with number or lerfu-string
16:52 < zipcpi> And (crazy idea) this might even allow us to drop fo'V
16:52 < zipcpi> I'm not sure we'd need all five ko'V either, but meh
17:16 < zipcpi> Hmm... {ko'ai} does also suffer from the {boi} problem though, at least in {abu za'u re'u cusku}
17:16 < zipcpi> Well, it's in LI, so xornunsep "fixes" that. xornunsep is incompatible with selpamnunpav though :p
17:19 < zipcpi> Oh crap that means I can't complain about LI...LOhO anymore if I want {ko'ai} to work. But meh, I dunno what is best here anymore. Too much contention
19:29 < zipcpi> exp: zo ifle cu se smuni lo ka ge ganai me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'e gi ga me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'i
19:29 < mensi> ([zo ifle] [cu {se smuni} {lo <ka (¹CU [ge {CU <ga nai> <CU (²me'au ko'a MEhU²) VAU> gi <CU (²me'au ko'e MEhU²) VAU> VAU} gi {CU <ga (²CU [me'au ko'a MEhU] VAU²) gi (²CU [me'au ko'i MEhU] VA
19:29 < mensi> U²) VAU>} VAU]¹) KEI> KU} VAU])
23:10 < gleki> mensi: doi xalbo {broda pa roi ro jeftu} is indeed a fix. no matter what the phase is it will still be once a week (unlike paroi lo jeftu). but for {di'i lo jeftu} im not sure.
23:10 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.xalbo.gy. di'a cusku da
23:11 < gleki> for me {ka'e} expands not to fasnu but to fanbu so {ka'enai} is fine
23:54 < zahlman> en: fanbu
23:54 < mensi> fanbu'u [< falnu bukpu ≈ Sail cloth] = b1 is canvas of material b2.
23:55 < zahlman> y
23:57 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ELG._Subjunctives,_imaginary_situations
23:57 < gleki> zahlman: ^
--- Day changed Wed Jul 15 2015
00:09 < zipcpi> Are there actually any lujvo with -dum-?
00:10 < zipcpi> I'm just wondering if it'd be mabla if I made {dumsku} have the same structure as {cusku}, but with x2 being a du'u
00:10 < zipcpi> I'm somewhat tired of wondering if {la .tom. cu cusku lo jetnu} is a type error
00:10 < zipcpi> And having to use {lu'e} is just ugly there
00:18 < b_jonas> zipcpi: the radical alternative I was considering is to just determine that {xusra} has the same x1 and x3 and x4 places as {cusku}
00:18 < b_jonas> (but it's probably better to make up some new word for that)
00:18 < zipcpi> Ah
00:19 < zipcpi> Hm don't think that'll break anything; adding places isn't that problematic
00:19 < zipcpi> "via expressive medium" might be though lol
00:20 < zipcpi> Or we could just coin {skuxu'a} or something
00:20 < b_jonas> zipcpi: I don't know what would be the best solution, but in any case, when you try to figure out how you want to use these words, please consider how to say not only “states/claims” but also “asks the question” and “requests/commands”
00:20 < durka42> coi .i ma cabdeispo
00:21 < zipcpi> Oh right
00:21 < zipcpi> All that illocutionary force thing again
00:21 < zipcpi> coi durka
00:21 < durka42> mi bapli lo bilma se cusku
00:21 < durka42> ill-locution zo'o
00:21 < zipcpi> lol
00:22 < gleki> there is smusku
00:23 < zipcpi> Right; still don't know how to define those things in Lojban lol
00:24 < gleki> .dict illocution
00:24 < fenki> illocution — noun: 1. (linguistics) The aim of a speaker in making an utterance as opposed to the meaning of the terms used
00:24 < zipcpi> Something with te zukte?
00:25 < durka42> jbo:ca'e
00:25 < mensi> ca'e = [UI2] tcita le se cusku le du'u la'e ri jetnu seja'e le nu ri se cusku
00:25 < durka42> that wasn't helpful .u'i
00:25 < durka42> jbo:ru'a
00:25 < mensi> ru'a = [UI2] tcita le se cusku le du'u la'e ri se sruma
00:26 < zipcpi> Oh by the way I made a replacement for that {ju'oi}={ju'ocu'i} thing. It's {cau'i}
00:26 < gleki> Illocution refers to what in linguistics is usually termed types of speech acts, i.e., the general purpose of a statement such as whether it is an assertion, a command, a declaratory pronouncement, a question, a warning, etc. This is a category which is not generally marked within Western languages in any consistent grammatical sense, the nearest equivalent grammatical category usually being Mood. As was see
00:26 < gleki> n above in Section 5.1, Mood functions in a much narrower grammatical range than in Western languages. When the moods of Western language actually relate to types of speech acts, the equivalent function in Ithkuil is shown by the category of Illocution.
00:26 < durka42> smusku ~ sei mi do lo smuni cu jungau
00:27 < zipcpi> ... darn suddenly Ithkuil comes along. And I still haven't got around to getting that book
00:27 < durka42> ithkuil: smusku
00:27 < ithkuil> smusku: P1S1/STA-sm-IND-COH/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-AMG-IFL/UNFRAMED
00:27 < gleki> actually i did something to illocution section https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SI7G0C-MoJIZ51N8jhL_7rLd6mIHA4Waq3F7w159RRs/edit
00:28 < zipcpi> I have no idea what all that is T.T
00:28 < gleki> selmaho:xu
00:28 < mensi> .i lu xu li'u cmavo zo'oi UI6
00:28 < mensi> http://lojban.github.io/cll/13/13/
00:28 < mensi> cmavo: xu'au
00:28 < gleki> selmaho:ui6
00:28 < mensi> cmavo: ge'e, ki'a, ko'oi, xu
00:28 < zipcpi> Hm that Essence thing reminds me of veridicality
00:29 < gleki> so ithkuil illocution is xu,ca'e,za'a,ju'a,ko'oi <-- select some of them
00:29 < gleki> also o'i, au
00:30 < zipcpi> It's funny though that maybe Curtis' {cau'o'e} might come in handy; maybe shortened to {cau'e}
00:30 < gleki> hm, then what is irrealis
00:30 < durka42> zo da'i
00:31 < b_jonas> um, stupid question
00:31 < b_jonas> en: seldaumupli
00:31 < mensi> seldaumupli [< se darlu mupli ≈ 2nd conversion argue example] = m1=d2 is a counterexample of common property(s) m2 of
00:31 < mensi> set m3, given by d1 against stand/argument d3. |>>> jongausib
00:32 < b_jonas> ^ how the heck is that lujvo composed? the parts don't seem to imply "counter" anywhere
00:32 < b_jonas> seldarlu means a theory to support, not a theory to disprove
00:32 < b_jonas> (that's the definition from jbovlaste)
00:33 < durka42> confusing
00:33 < durka42> it's a counterexample of the te darlu, meaning it's actually a positive example of the se darlu
00:33 < durka42> I think
00:34 < durka42> iepei (to doinai la mensi toi)
00:34 < mensi> ei mi tugni
00:35 < b_jonas> I'd be totally confused by that word if I read it in a text, rather than met it in a dictionary while searching for some other words
00:35 < durka42> well, that's what dictionaries are for
00:35 < durka42> but yeah, "counterexample" is probably the wrong glossword
00:35 < gleki> mupli lo dukti
00:36 < durka42> that would be a better translation of "counterexample"
00:36 < durka42> dutmupli
00:36 < durka42> what's a better gloss for seldaumupli
00:36 < durka42> .ai galfi
00:37 < gleki> i cant see any justification for {mupli lo se darlu}
00:37 < durka42> "supporting example" i'epei
00:37 < gleki> is it that someone wanted to relex english?
00:37 < durka42> zo seldaumupli na veljvo lu mupli lo se darlu li'u pe'i
00:37 < durka42> y
00:37 < durka42> zo seldaumupli na lujvo fu lu mupli lo se darlu li'u pe'i
00:38 < zipcpi> I think dukti is better
00:38 < durka42> lujvo fu mu'a lu mupli gi'e se pilno lo se darlu li'u
00:38 < zipcpi> Or natfe even
00:38 < zipcpi> Yeah maybe natfe
00:38 < durka42> nafmupli is defined by noralujv
00:38 < durka42> ok so I'll fix it and steal the gloss from seldaumupli
00:39 < zipcpi> Yay
00:39 < b_jonas> je'e
00:39 < durka42> nafmupli is glossed as "exception" though
00:39 < durka42> that's the same isn't it
00:39 < zipcpi> I think so?
00:40 < durka42> x1 is a counterexample to property x2, normally exemplified by set x3
00:40 < durka42> i'epei
00:40 < gleki> exception can be from a rule
00:40 < gleki> so nafmupli is not an exception
00:40 < durka42> counterexample of a property
00:40 < durka42> exception to a rule
00:40 < durka42> same thing, no?
00:41 < gleki> that needs {javni}
00:41 < gleki> example may not imply forming a rule.
00:42 < durka42> I don't understand the objection, but I'll leave out "exception" I guess
00:42 < gleki> e.g. wetry to form a theory, i provide examples, you provide counterexamples so we cannot form a rule. then we agree and form a rule including all those examples. suddenly in 10 years someone comes and provides a new examples. it will be counterexamples but it'll now be an exception to the rule
00:43 < gleki> so those are different perspectives.
00:43 < durka42> but even the first theory we were trying to form was a rule
00:43 < durka42> it just wasn't a good rule .u'i
00:43 < gleki> yes, but before the rule was formed there were no exceptions to it
00:43 < gleki> since the rule didnt exist
00:44 < gleki> we just listed excamples and counterexamples
00:45 < durka42> ah now I understand the intent behind {seldaumupli}, .u'i
00:45 < gleki> btw, what happened to {kalri},. did y'all finally kill it? i dont {lr} in it.
00:46 < durka42> fabu nafmupli febu boi fibu .ije fobu pilno la'edi'u lo ka darlu fi fubu
00:46 < gleki> *dont like
00:48 < durka42> mi jmina lo jbovelcki zo seldaumupli .ije canau .ei jdice co cikre lo glico
00:49 < durka42> sa'u .ai mi jmina lo klesi lo pavmeixelfanva
00:51 < zipcpi> (CU [nu {CU <(¹ju'e gi¹) broda (¹[gi brode] [gi brodi] [gi brodo] [gi brodu]¹) GIhI> VAU} KEI] VAU)
00:51 < zipcpi> u'i doi zantufa
00:52 < b_jonas> I would guess {seldaumupli} is example of those silly lujvo mistakes that have found themselves to a dictionary, like {selxraci'a skina} which is very likely a typo for {xraselci'a skina} especially as {xraselci'a} is already in the dictionary
00:52 < durka42> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/natlang/en/counterexample
00:52 < zipcpi> She repurposed {gi'i}; heh
00:53 < durka42> huh, she made n-ary gi?
00:53 < zipcpi> Yep
00:53 < durka42> I thought that had really bad ambiguity problems
00:53 < zipcpi> I think she fixed it by repurposing {gi'i}
00:53 < zipcpi> Hence the GIhI
00:53 < durka42> what's the latest URL for zantufa?
00:53 < durka42> ua
00:53 < durka42> zantufa: coi
00:53 < gleki> zantufa: mi prami do
00:54 < durka42> na ircysampre
00:54 < zipcpi> http://guskant.github.io/gerna_cipra/zantufa-0.2.html
00:54 < durka42> zantufa1: coi
00:54 < akmnlrse> zantufa: cipra
00:54 < zantufa1> (CU [cipra VAU])
00:55 < gleki> zantufa1: noi
00:55 < zipcpi> Hm selpa'i-jecu works, but selpa'i-guje doesn't work
00:55 < akmnlrse> spuda tu'a zo zantufa lu'u po'o
00:55 < gleki> zantufa:  noi
00:55 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a ['h] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
00:55 < akmnlrse> fa ji'a lo fadni gerna na zanru la gudje
00:56 < durka42> zipcpi: yeah it seems {gu} was never implemented
00:56 < durka42> probably an oversight
00:56 < durka42> oh, zantufa doesn't have {gaje} either
00:56 < durka42> strange
00:56 < akmnlrse> lo'u gi je le'u basti
00:56 < akmnlrse> soi cizra
00:56 < durka42> zantufa: ge broda gi ga brode gi brodi gi brodo
00:56 < zantufa1> (CU [ge broda {gi <ga brode (¹[gi brodi] [gi brodo]¹) GIhI>} GIhI] VAU)
00:56 < durka42> zantufa: ge broda gi ga brode gi brodi gi'i gi brodo
00:56 < zantufa1> (CU [ge broda {<gi (¹ga brode [gi brodi] gi'i¹)> <gi brodo>} GIhI] VAU)
00:56 < zipcpi> By the way I also found a second purpose for {bo'V}. Namely an easier way to make n-ary ka
00:57 < zipcpi> Currently {ka'ei}
00:57 < durka42> nope, can't do it
00:57 < durka42> you already stole bo'V for FAbu
00:57 < durka42> it's taken
00:57 < durka42> see the problem? xD
00:57 < zipcpi> It's both
00:57 < akmnlrse> li'ai fabu ba'e du lo me zo ce'u moi
00:57 < zipcpi> Essentially the FAbu purpose is a hidden ka'ei
00:58 < durka42> wtf is ka'ei
00:58 < durka42> that's a krtis-level definition
00:58 < zipcpi> It's {ka}, but with bo'V instead of ce'u
00:58 < durka42> damn
00:58 < durka42> why didn't you write anything related to that
00:58 < zipcpi> I did
00:58 < durka42> abstractor: predicate relationship abstractor; x1 is the relationship expressed by [bridi], binds to bo'a-set
00:58 < durka42> please
00:59 < zipcpi> Notes
00:59 < zipcpi> I put a lot of things in notes x.x
00:59 < durka42> the notes are acceptable, but the definition should also be not just a string of random words
00:59 < zipcpi> u'i
00:59 < durka42> en:ka
00:59 < mensi> ka = [NU] abstractor: property/quality abstractor (-ness); x1 is quality/property exhibited by [bridi].
00:59 < durka42> well that one is no good either
01:00 < gleki> btw, i removed  {i broda cu [me zo'e] noi mo} from altatufa since it conflicted with {i broda noi ke'a mo}
01:00 < durka42> I mean your definition would be better as "ka'ei: [NU] see notes"
01:00 < zipcpi> u'i
01:00 < zipcpi> I dunno; is the {ka} one any better?
01:01 < zipcpi> And that doesn't even have notes
01:01 < gleki> jb: ka
01:01 < mensi> ka = ka [clause prefix] — turn clause into infinitive
01:01 < mensi> :mi djica lo ka sipna — I want to sleep.
01:01 < mensi> :la Alis cu nitcu lo ka te dunda lo birje — Alice needs to be given beer.
01:01 < mensi> :ta'i ku do ba cirko lo ka sinma ce'u — This way you will lose the respect.
01:01 < mensi> :lo pa tadji be lo ka se pendo cu ka pendo — The only way to have a friend is to be a friend.
01:01 < mensi> :Comment: x1 (property) is the property of the clause that follows. Has at least one ce'u inside referring to a noun of
01:01 < mensi> the outer clause. ka without a ce'u inside is the same as ka ce'u. Used to express infinitives.
01:01 < durka42> no, it's not any better
01:01 < durka42> but that's original ma'oste
01:01 < zipcpi> lol
01:01 < durka42> which is like the benchmark for terrible definitions
01:01 < durka42> so... anything we write should be better
01:01 < zipcpi> OK I gotta go though
01:01 < akmnlrse> .ei lo za'o lifri be lo purci be CLL cu salci
01:01 < zipcpi> See ya
01:01 < zipcpi> I'll see about fixing it when I get back
01:02 < durka42> I'll try to think of a better one
01:02 < durka42> co'o uai
01:02 < akmnlrse> uai bi ka zai setso
01:04 < akmnlrse> di'e zo'u .ei fa ji'a na'e la zantufa cu se pagbu lo simsa
01:04 < akmnlrse> zantufa: gi ba bo broda gi brode
01:04 < zantufa1> (CU [{gi ba bo} broda {gi brode} GIhI] VAU)
01:05 < akmnlrse> .i li'a selsmudu'i lo'u ba gi le'u .i ku'i da'i curmi lo simsa be di'e
01:05 < akmnlrse> zantufa: ba gi ba bo broda gi brode
01:05 < zantufa1> (CU [ba {gi ba bo} broda {gi brode} GIhI] VAU)
01:06 < akmnlrse> zantufa: ba gi ba bo broda gi brode gi'i je mo
01:06 < zantufa1> (CU [ba {<gi ba bo> broda <gi brode> gi'i} {je mo}] VAU)
01:06 < gleki> ei lebna so'i da la zantufa
01:06 < akmnlrse> yyy ue
01:06 < akmnlrse> .i cupra lo ba'e .gu'ek.
01:06 < akmnlrse> zantufa: ba gi ba bo cu broda gi brode gi'i je mo
01:06 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
01:06 < akmnlrse> zantufa: ba gi ba bo broda gi brode gi'i je cu mo
01:06 < zantufa1> (CU [{ba <gi ba bo> broda <gi brode> gi'i} VAU] [je cu {mo VAU} VAU])
01:06 < akmnlrse> zantufa: ba gi ba bo broda gi brode zo'e gi'i je cu mo
01:06 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
01:07 < akmnlrse> zantufa: ba ku gi ba bo broda gi brode zo'e gi'i je cu mo
01:07 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
01:07 < akmnlrse> zantufa: gi je broda gi brode zo'e gi'i je cu mo
01:07 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
01:08 < akmnlrse> zantufa: gi je broda gi brode zo'e gi'i
01:08 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [oO] .onai [uU] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
01:08 < akmnlrse> zantufa: ge broda gi brode zo'e gi'i
01:08 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [oO] .onai [uU] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
01:08 < akmnlrse> xu spofu
01:11 < gleki> spagetufa: lo mi je do mo cu mo
01:11 < spagetufa> ([FA {lo <NE (¹mi je do¹)> mo KU}] [cu {mo VAU}])
01:12 < akmnlrse> di'u zo'u mi za'o na cikre
01:13 < gleki> mo co'u morji lo du'u makau nabmi ibo u'i
01:13 < akmnlrse> spagetufa: lo mi je ne do mo cu mo
01:13 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "m" found.
01:14 < gleki> spagetufa: ro lo ma'a je ne do datka cu lalxu limna va
01:14 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,], [0123456789], [lL], [mM], [nN] or [rR] but "v" found.
01:14 < gleki> ie
01:14 < gleki> alta: ro lo ma'a je ne do datka cu lalxu limna va
01:14 < mensi> (I [FA {ro BOI} {lo <(¹NE [FIhA ma'a] GEhU¹) (¹je [ne {FIhA do} GEhU]¹)> <datka NF>} KU] [cu {lalxu <limna NF>} {va ZOhE} VAU])
01:14 < akmnlrse> ja'o .ei mi lebna
01:14 < gleki> cinri i mi spaji mi u'i
01:15 < akmnlrse> zantufa: nu mo .i mo
01:15 < zantufa1> ([CU {nu <CU (¹mo VAU¹)> KEI} VAU] [i {CU <mo VAU>}])
01:15 < gleki> i lebna e'asai i ku'i la alta ka'e tcefrica
01:15 < akmnlrse> zantufa: nu mo .i bo mo
01:15 < zantufa1> (CU [nu {<CU (¹mo VAU¹)> <i bo (¹CU [mo VAU]¹)>} KEI] VAU)
01:15 < gleki> uasai
01:15 < gleki> i pe'i nasai drani
01:15 < akmnlrse> te zukte ku'i
01:15 < gleki> i zo i jufra ke ralju jai sidbo
01:16 < gleki> i zo i muvgau lo tcidu lo nomoi senta
01:16 < gleki> i ku'i ma'i la zantufa co'u muvgau
01:17 < akmnlrse> simsa tu'a lo .gek. lo ka na kompatibli
01:17 < durka42> uo zo seldaumupli je zo nafmupli cu se jbovelcki
01:27 < gleki> i wrote a rhymed translation of one important text 
01:31 < akmnlrse> alta: mobabocumo
01:31 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] or ['hiI] but "b" found.
01:31 < gleki> do pu kanpe ma
01:31 < akmnlrse> kanpe no da .i kucli lo du'u xu kau cumki
01:32 < gleki> zantufa:  mo babocumo
01:32 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [0123456789] .i ku'i "b" cu se tolcri
01:32 < gleki> i ua
01:32 < gleki> i lo ciste pe la selpa'i
01:32 < gleki> i je'e
01:32 < gleki> i la jecus
01:32 < gleki> i na djuno i mi na pilno la jecus
01:33 < gleki> i ba'a frili fa lonu jmina
01:33 < akmnlrse> da'i lo'u babocu le'u curmi lo nu pilno lo'u gibabao le'u lo ralju jai se kanpe
01:33 < gleki> alta: mi babo do klama
01:33 < mensi> (I [FA {mi <ba bo do>}] [CU {klama NF} VAU])
01:34 < akmnlrse> s/babao/babo
01:34 < fenki> akmnlrse meant to say: da'i lo'u babocu le'u curmi lo nu pilno lo'u gibabo le'u lo ralju jai se kanpe
01:34 < gleki> lo sumtcita ce'o zo bo cu terjonma'o vau aidai
01:34 < gleki> anyway here is the poem http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=snMdD0MJ
01:35 < ctefa`o> coi
01:36 < akmnlrse> melbi
01:36 < gleki> i ku'i se kuspe nabmi
01:36 < akmnlrse> .i zo bi'a co'e li'o .i'e
01:37 < akmnlrse> coi .nictyfam.
01:37 < gleki> zo bi'a pu se finti mivau noi krinu lo nu se permite fi lo ka pilno vau zo'o
01:43 < akmnlrse> spagetufa: mobakubabobroda
01:43 < spagetufa> ([CU {mo <(¹ba ku¹) VAU>}] JU'E ba bo [CU {bròda VAU}] VAU)
01:45 < gleki> oi
01:45 < gleki> i nandu
01:46 < akmnlrse> la'oi abs_tag_term cu nitcu tu'a lo nu lutkaxede lo du'u zo bo na se lidne
01:46 < gleki> zo lutkaxede mo
01:46 < akmnlrse> me'oi lookahead sei mabla
01:47 < gleki> oi ei finti lo jbovla
01:47 < akmnlrse> bavycipra ja serlidcipa ja mo kau
01:47 < akmnlrse> s/dc/nc/
01:47 < fenki> akmnlrse meant to say: bavycipra ja serlincipa ja mo kau
01:47 < gleki> na djuno
01:48 < gleki> i e'uzo'o zo murmurai prane dunli
01:48 < gleki> i e'uzo'o zo murmura i prane dunli
01:48 < akmnlrse> je'u
02:21 < akmnlrse> alta: lo pu ku je ne ti mo
02:21 < mensi> (I [{FA ZOhE} {CU <FASNU (¹FA [LO {NU <(²FA [lo {pu COhE} ku]²) (²CU [COhE VAU]²) (²je [CU {COhE VAU}] VAU²)> KEI} KU] [ne {FIhA ti} GEhU]¹) VAU>}] [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <mo VAU>}])
02:23 < akmnlrse> alta: lotige'ujepukumo
02:23 < mensi> (I [FA {lo <(¹[NE {FIhA ti} ge'u] [je {NE <pu ku> GEhU}]¹) mo> KU}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
02:29 < durka42> zo fi'a xu
02:29 < akmnlrse> je'u la'a zo do'e matmau
02:30 < gleki> li'a ma'a ka'e na tugni la altatufai ku'i ma drani se cikre stura
02:30 < akmnlrse> mi na pante .i sa'u .ei jdice lo du'u ma kau jinga
02:31 < durka42> mi jinga
02:31 < durka42> uo
02:31 < akmnlrse> le zei le
02:31 < gleki> zo do'e zo'u ei finti lo cnino javni to lo ni javni cu zenba toi
02:32 < durka42> sa'u zo fi'a jai preti .i lu lo ne ti mo li'u na jai preti
02:32 < durka42> y ja'a preti .i ku'i drata preti .u'i
02:32 < gleki> zo do'e na srana ma'oi fa
02:32 < akmnlrse> xa'o ku ji'i ci'i da noi srana lo te sumti nu facku cu javni
02:33 < akmnlrse> s/cku/cki/
02:33 < fenki> akmnlrse meant to say: xa'o ku ji'i ci'i da noi srana lo te sumti nu facki cu javni
02:33 < durka42> zo do'e ka'e basti ma'oi fa
02:33 < gleki> je'upei
02:34 < durka42> mi tugni do'e do
02:34 < durka42> mi tugni fi'o se tugni do
02:34 < durka42> mi tugni fe do
02:34 < akmnlrse> lo se jinvi cu su'ai frica
02:34 < gleki> zo su'ai morsi ti'e
02:35 < gleki> alta: mi ne do cu mo
02:35 < mensi> (I [FA {mi <ne (¹DOhE do¹) GEhU>}] [cu {mo VAU}])
02:35 < akmnlrse> zo su'ai se gu morsi gi za'o se nelci mi
02:35 < durka42> zo su'ai morsi .i ko ze'u jmive doi zo su'ai
02:36 < gleki> en: su'ai
02:36 < mensi> su'ai = [PA4] digit/number: precise to within the stated sigfigs (significant figures/digits); approximately, measured
02:36 < mensi> to be approximately, with some error/rounding |>>> In the su'e and su'o family. See also: su'au. |>>>
02:36 < mensi> krtisfranks
02:36 < akmnlrse> oi
02:36 < durka42> oi
02:36 < gleki> zekri
02:36 < gleki> en: su'a'ai
02:36 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
02:36 < gleki> xm
02:36 < akmnlrse> zo kai'a zo ju'oi zo zo'au zo la'ai li'o li'o li'o
02:36 < akmnlrse> .i uu doi morsi
02:38 < gleki> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/su'a'ai
02:38 < akmnlrse> xa'o ni'adzau
02:38 < akmnlrse> fa ma
02:38 < gleki> mi
02:39 < akmnlrse> ua
02:39 < gleki> i la kurtis pu lebna i seki'ubo mi finti lo cnino
02:39 < gleki> i mi pu milxe na'e nelci si si nelci be naku zo su'ai i ki'u bo lo gerna cu cnino
02:40 < akmnlrse> ka'e xusra lo dunli pe zo zu'ai
02:42 < gleki> zosu'ai vimcu lo cmima be lo te bridi i mabla simsa zo zi'o
02:42 < gleki> y i na go'i
02:43 < gleki> i zo su'ai cmavo zo se gi'e ku'i tarti tai zo zi'o i je lo nu ba'e go'i cu nabmi
02:45 < durka42> na nabmi .i ko pensi zo jai noi naru'e cmavo ma'oi se .i tarti lo dukte be zo zi'o
02:46 < durka42> su'a ma'oi se zo'u galfi lo te bridi
02:48 < gleki> oi na djuno i do'o jdice
02:48 < gleki> i sa'u zo zu'ai milxe nolmalgli ma'i mi gi'e ku'i na se cfila i seki'ubo mi pilnp
02:49 < gleki> *normalgli
02:49 < durka42> en:zu'ai
02:49 < mensi> zu'ai = [KOhA7] shows mutual activity between this place and the first place of the current bridi; members participating
02:49 < mensi> in the activity are put into the first place (that e.g. can be formed by connecting sumti with ce or
02:49 < mensi> jo'u)
02:49 < durka42> simsa lo tcepru me zo soi
02:51 < gleki> to u'i lo normalgli na bi'ai normale toi
02:52 < gleki> zo zu'ai simsa zo simxu i ku'i zo soi na go'i
02:52 < durka42> do pu cusku zo nolmagli ga'idaipei .u'i
02:52 < gleki> pu srera
02:56 < gleki> i ju'oru'e le uitki cu zenba lo ka stodi
02:59 < durka42> lo se uitki ji lo selfu cu stodi
03:00 < gleki> lo selfu
03:00 < durka42> je'e ie
03:15 < zipcpi> But yeah I kinda like how {bo'V} turned out. They're essentially variables that automatically assign themselves to {ce'u} through an implied {ce'ai} prenex whenever {ka'ei} is used. Definitions of brivla are just {ka'ei}-based.
03:15 < zipcpi> fi'i la .fancylojban.
03:17 < zipcpi> There's a reason I put them in KOhA8 with {ce'u}
03:30 < zipcpi> exp: ko'a jo'u ko'e jo'unai ko'i
03:30 < mensi> ([ko'a {jo'u ko'e} {jo'u nai} ko'i] VAU)
03:30 < zipcpi> off: ko'a jo'u ko'e jo'unai ko'i
03:30 < mensi> ([ko'a {jo'u ko'e} {jo'u nai} ko'i] VAU)
04:30 < Spheniscine_> zantufa: gaje gajanai me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'e gi'i gi gaja me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'i
04:30 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [oO] .onai [uU] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
04:30 < Spheniscine_> zantufa: gaje gajanai me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'e gi gaja me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'i
04:30 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [oO] .onai [uU] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
04:31 < Spheniscine_> ba'a nandu
04:31 < Spheniscine_> zantufa: gajanai me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'e
04:31 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [oO] .i ku'i "e" cu se tolcri
04:31 < Spheniscine_> zantufa: ganai me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'e
04:31 < zantufa1> (CU [{ga nai} {me'au ko'a MEhU} {gi <me'au ko'e MEhU>} GIhI] VAU)
04:31 < Spheniscine_> ua
04:32 < Spheniscine_> zantufa: ge ganai me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'e gi'i gi ga me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'i
04:32 < zantufa1> (CU [ge {<ga nai> <me'au ko'a MEhU> <gi (¹me'au ko'e MEhU¹)> gi'i} {gi <ga (¹me'au ko'a MEhU¹) (¹gi [me'au ko'i MEhU]¹) GIhI>} GIhI] VAU)
04:32 < Spheniscine_> zantufa: ge ganai me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'e gi ga me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'i
04:32 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [oO] .onai [uU] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
04:34 < Spheniscine_> So la zantufa implemented JE cu and repurposed gi'i, but did not implement GAJE and GUJE
04:35 < Spheniscine_> coi la jenca
04:53  * nuzba @graywyvern: zo drani .enai zo draci cu drani #lojban [http://bit.ly/1Hu7TTE]
05:17 < Spheniscine_> Wait maybe zantufa took a different approach...
05:17 < Spheniscine_> zantufa: jegi broda gi brode
05:17 < zantufa1> (CU [{je gi} broda {gi brode} GIhI] VAU)
05:17 < akmnlrse> zantufa: gi je broda gi brode
05:17 < zantufa1> (CU [{gi je} broda {gi brode} GIhI] VAU)
05:18 < akmnlrse> re versiio cu se zanru
05:18 < Spheniscine_> Ah
05:18 < Spheniscine_> How does it distinguish between tanru and bridi forethought though?
05:19 < Spheniscine_> zantufa: gije cu broda gi cu brode
05:19 < zantufa1> ([gi je] [cu {broda VAU}] [gi {cu <brode VAU>}] GIhI)
05:19 < akmnlrse> na djuno .i mi pu troci lo ka gau ce gentufa tai tau lo na'e tanru fortote
05:19 < akmnlrse> gi'e fliba
05:19 < akmnlrse> sisi kei gi'e fliba
05:19 < akmnlrse> .i ue
05:20 < akmnlrse> zantufa: gi je broda gi brode zo'e gi'i je cu mo
05:20 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
05:20 < durka42> oi la zantufa cu pilno lo mipri ke terjonma'o ciste
05:20 < akmnlrse> zantufa: gi je broda gi brode zo'e gi'i
05:20 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [oO] .onai [uU] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
05:21 < akmnlrse> zantufa: gi je cu broda gi brode zo'e gi'i
05:21 < zantufa1> ([gi je] [cu {broda VAU}] [gi {CU <brode (¹zo'e VAU¹)>}] gi'i)
05:21 < akmnlrse> zantufa: gi je cu broda gi brode zo'e gi'i je cu mo
05:21 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
05:21 < akmnlrse> zantufa: gi je cu broda gi brode zo'e gi'i gi'e mo
05:21 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
05:21 < Spheniscine_> moi'iru'e da ve ciksi
05:21 < durka42> learning by brute force .u'i
05:22 < Spheniscine_> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/zantufa_jonma%27o#lo_li.27erla.27i_jonma.27o
05:22 < Spheniscine_> ku'i le kibystu cu spofu ga'a mi
05:23 < durka42> za'a
05:23 < Spheniscine_> oi la jbouitki
05:23 < Spheniscine_> oi la vrici
05:23 < Spheniscine_> mu'i ma mu'i ma mu'i ma
05:28 < gleki> mo
05:28 < gleki> i le uitki na spofu 
05:28 < zipcpi> ca na spofu
05:30 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/index.html#sisku/commerce
05:30 < gleki> u'i
05:31 < zipcpi> u'i
05:31 < zipcpi> zo merce ki'a
05:33 < gleki> la'a simsa la vi valdi
05:33 < durka42> comymerce*
05:34 < gleki> under mensi's lujvo katna algoritma {commerce} is acceptable
05:34 < durka42> in other words the lujvo katna algorithm is too loose
05:36 < zipcpi> Meh, let's just go Ithkuil; everything is phonemic
05:36 < zipcpi> If you cough, you're likely insulting someone's mother
05:36 < durka42> ithkuil: lujykatny'algoritma
05:36 < ithkuil> error
05:36 < gleki> mensi simply isnt too harsh when people forget {y}
05:37 < gleki> People, I need help from someone who understands Lojban and another constructed language. There is a relay,a broken phone game. I just translated one text from Interlingue to Lojban and now someone else should translate it further to another conlang.
05:38 < zipcpi> mi na se runbau lo drata
05:38 < durka42> .ai mi bazu se spero
05:38 < gleki> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iDee0cS55ogA2QSxaNE_nFnFSaYtBMltpK4q6R8n2qU/edit#heading=h.oeaisag0j10f
05:43 < zipcpi> zantufa: lo nu broda ibo brode
05:43 < zantufa1> ([lo {nu <(¹CU [broda VAU]¹) (¹i bo [CU {brode VAU}]¹)> KEI} KU] VAU)
05:43 < zipcpi> makfa
05:43 < gleki> mi na nelci
05:43 < mensi> e'u do vrude pajni gi'e nai ze'i co'a cinmo lo ka nelci
05:44 < zipcpi> .iku'i janli pe'a la'e lo'u <.ibo> le'u pe la gleki
05:45 < durka42> oi
05:45 < durka42> mabla mabla
05:45 < durka42> now she's gone too far
05:45 < zipcpi> ei mi finti la maltufa iau zo'o
05:46 < zipcpi> ro da me ma'oi UI
05:46 < durka42> lo lo'u zei gentufa
05:46 < zipcpi> u'i
05:46 < durka42> zantufa: lo nu broda .ije brode
05:46 < zantufa1> ([lo {nu <(¹CU [broda VAU]¹) (¹i je [CU {brode VAU}]¹)> KEI} KU] VAU)
05:47 < durka42> if {.i} doesn't start a new sentence...
05:47 < durka42> oi oi oi
05:47 < zipcpi> Hm yeah I see a problem
05:47 < durka42> it basically eliminates elidible terminators
05:47 < zipcpi> I don't really use .ibo, but .ije might be problematic
05:48 < durka42> zantufa: lo nu broda .i brode
05:48 < zantufa1> ([{lo <nu (¹CU [broda VAU]¹) KEI> KU} VAU] [i {CU <brode VAU>}])
05:48 < durka42> so it breaks compositionality as well
05:49 < zipcpi> I kinda like the {gi'i} thing though. Even though it does break some old constructs that rely on it being binary
05:49 < durka42> ie
05:50 < gleki> what is this gi'i
05:50 < durka42> terminator for n-ary gi
05:51 < zipcpi> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban/NRUIud_OCj8
05:51 < gleki> i hope someone can translate this text e.g. to Esperanto or toki pona
05:52 < zipcpi> e'u do pante ki'oi ta
05:52 < gleki> en: ki'oi
05:52 < zipcpi> fi'o se kibzva
05:53 < durka42> je'e
05:53 < gleki> actually yes, zihe is now in ja/joi in altatufa
05:57 < gleki> i also hope that SI was implemented fine by her
06:15 < zipcpi> cau'a co'e do'e xo'e zo'e ge'e cau'i
06:19 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/on_Lojbanic_Style
06:19 < gleki> lost forever
06:19 < gleki> web archive doesnt have it
06:19 < zipcpi> .y. seja'e ma
06:19 < zipcpi> ua la'oi geocities
06:20 < zipcpi> ze'e cirko
06:21 < zipcpi> oi la'oi robots.txt
06:21 < gleki> ie ie
06:21 < gleki> i la'oi Athens mo
06:22 < gleki> and that's the reason i dont like new lojban websites
06:22 < zipcpi> ju'oinaisai
06:22 < gleki> i spent too much time trying to restore such links
06:22 < gleki> when i was the only editor of lmw
06:31 < zipcpi> I really don't know what {jo'a} is for. {na'i} = "the statement is not framed properly to have a proper truth value"; {jo'a} = "it *is* framed properly"?
06:32 < gleki> yes
06:32 < zipcpi> But doesn't actually say anything about the truth value
06:32 < gleki> "your e.g. question makes perfect sense, this questions has right to be asked"
06:32  * zipcpi nods
06:32 < gleki> jb: jo'a
06:32 < zipcpi> Then it's probably used wrongly here then: https://soundcloud.com/cogas-iuk/sunday-10-38-pm
06:33 < zipcpi> Probably he means {je'u}
06:33 < mensi> jo'a = jo'a [interjection] — the clause can make sense in meaning (metalinguistic
06:33 < mensi> affirmer)
06:33 < mensi> :lu xu le prenu noi sanli ne'a lo va dinju cu ninmu li'u lu jo'a li'u — 'Is the person standing near that building a
06:33 < mensi> woman?' 'The sentence is formed correctly (there is a person standing near the building, the question of whether it's a
06:33 < mensi> woman is applicable).'
06:33 < mensi> :Comment: na'i is metalinguistic negation.
06:33 < mensi> :Related words: drani
06:34 < gleki> ah, I_clause in altatufa and camxe.js in general is ugly
06:35 < gleki> text_1 til statement_3 need to be rewritten
06:36 < zipcpi> Hm... so {jo'a .iku'i mi na djuno} = "That's a good question, but I don't know"?
06:38 < gleki> where is this quote from?
06:38 < zipcpi> I just made it up
06:39 < zipcpi> Hm is the sour grapes thing meant to be a sort of "everyone translate and compare styles" thing?
06:39 < gleki> already in La Bangu :)
06:39 < zipcpi> You added it?
06:39 < gleki> yes, but not only that. there was already North Wind and the sun
06:39 < gleki> https://docs.google.com/document/d/13rEkPCDO3EX0JH5gle8tm68SfLVFBIDhilOgwNOXRHk/edit
06:40 < zipcpi> zo cu'uxna
06:41 < zipcpi> .y. mi se cfipu
06:42 < zipcpi> bo'a sanji lo nu bo'a ka'e ckini ro bo'i fi bo'o ku gi'e ca bo zukte lo ka ckini bo'e noi me bo'i ku'o bo'o
06:42 < zipcpi> oiro'e
06:44 < zipcpi> Hm I think this is just Ilmen trying to add an x4 to cuxna, I suppose
06:44 < zipcpi> x4 being what x1 chooses to do with x2
06:45 < zipcpi> coi la .ilmen.
06:45 < zipcpi> mi casnu zo cu'uxna pe do
06:45 < Ilmen> coi ru'e
06:45 < zipcpi> <zipcpi> Hm I think this is just Ilmen trying to add an x4 to cuxna, I suppose
06:45 < zipcpi> <zipcpi> x4 being what x1 chooses to do with x2
06:46 < Ilmen> xu da pe zo cu'uxna na jai se jimpe
06:46 < zipcpi> mi pu na jimpe .iku'i pe'i co'a jimpe
06:47 < Ilmen> sa'u zo cuxna cizra mi .i na'e satci gi'e smuni to'e klina vau soi simlu
06:47 < Ilmen> jbo: cuxna
06:47 < gleki> la vrici
06:47 < gleki> i mi ca troci lo ka kompili la altatufa i ku'i co'e
06:47 < Ilmen> mi zmanei zo cu'uxna
06:48 < zipcpi> Oh by the way I think you'll like {ka'ei}
06:49 < Ilmen> Xorxes' def of {cuxna} is {x1 jdice lo du'u x2 traji lo ka se nelci ja se zanru x1 gi'a mapti kei x3}, it seems
06:49 < zipcpi> And also what I chose to assign to the coveted {bo'V} set
06:49 < Ilmen> cu'uxna is {x1 sanji lo nu x1 ka'e ckini ro me x3 fi x4 ku gi'e ca bo zukte lo ka ckini x2 noi me x3 ku'o x4}
06:50 < Ilmen> With cu'uxna, you can indicate explicitly what is the choice's inherent purpose
06:50 < Ilmen> you can't really do that with cuxna, as far as I can tell
06:50 < zipcpi> Yeah I understand now
06:50 < Ilmen> {cuxna tezu'e} just don't work
06:50 < zipcpi> cu'uxna4 is what you choose to do with the thing
06:50 < zipcpi> Mm
06:52 < durka42> ba'o pante
06:52 < Ilmen> mi cuxna lo xunre lo tanxe te zu'e lonu.... --- here the fact that I've chosen the red box (to be in some unspecified relation with it) is for purpose/motivation...
06:52 < gleki> i use property in cuxna2
06:53 < gleki> but i suggest that you complain stronger so that i can get rid of this c/x/fricative intensive gismu
06:53 < Ilmen> Like {mi cuxna lo ka xunre ku lo so tanxe}?
06:53 < zipcpi> Can I just add a // definiton to cu'uxna?
06:53 < durka42> a what definition
06:53 < Ilmen> ki'a
06:53 < durka42> a commented out definition? xD
06:54 < zipcpi> Just a "second definition" that may be less precise but doesn't jump all over the terbri
06:54 < durka42> en:cu'uxna
06:54 < mensi`i> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
06:54 < zipcpi> plipe pe'a le terbri ciste
06:54 < mensi> cu'uxna = x1 is aware that x1 can be in relation x4 with all of x3 (plural) and choose to be in relation x4 with x2
06:54 < mensi> (which is among x3)
06:54 < Ilmen> Why not adding a note?
06:54 < zipcpi> OK
06:54 < durka42> wat
06:54 < durka42> .u'i
06:54 < zipcpi> " $x_1$ chooses $x_2$ out of set $x_3$ to do/have relationship $x_4$ (binary ka)"
06:55 < durka42> I think I remember proposing a definition quite similar to that
06:56 < gleki> mi cuxna lo ka xunre lo ka karce
06:57 < gleki> *vau
06:57 < Ilmen> For many gismu it feels like they have irrelevant sumti slots (e.g. material slots etc), but there are a few case where it feels like there's something missing, and that's the case with cuxna
06:57 < zipcpi> OK I edited the notes
06:58 < gleki> Ilmen: can u translate a short text from Lojban to Esperanto?
06:58 < Ilmen> gleki: it then becomes difficult to say things like "Please take the pen you have chosen"
06:59 < Ilmen> gleki: Have you a particular text in mind?
06:59 < zipcpi> There's a translation relay
06:59 < gleki> Ilmen: it can be raised to {lo penbi} too
06:59 < gleki> Ilmen: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iDee0cS55ogA2QSxaNE_nFnFSaYtBMltpK4q6R8n2qU/edit
07:00 < Ilmen> .ai catlu
07:00 < zipcpi> Crap, then we run into specificity again
07:01 < zipcpi> lo ka me la .samtin.
07:02 < Ilmen> gleki: Do we translate the original, or the last translation result, with potential information loss/alteration?
07:02 < Ilmen> If it's the latter, it would be funny to finish by translating the last translation back to the original language
07:02 < Ilmen> %)
07:02 < durka42> I think that's the idea
07:02 < durka42> like the game "telephone"
07:02 < Ilmen> je'e
07:03 < gleki> Ilmen: we translate from Lojban
07:03 < gleki> Ilmen: this broken phone game started with Ido probably
07:03 < Ilmen> Who made the Lojban translation?
07:04 < zipcpi> So should I also translate Sour Grapes, and cram in as many weird experimental cmavo as I can zo'o
07:04 < Ilmen> la slari kurtyma'o
07:04 < zipcpi> u'i
07:05 < gleki> Ilmen: me
07:05 < Ilmen> je'e
07:05 < gleki> and english translation too since interlingue is ... kinda superlost and superunderformalized language.
07:05 < gleki> to'e-U
07:06 < durka42> en:slari
07:06 < mensi> slari = x1 is sour/tart to observer x2.
07:06 < durka42> ua
07:06 < zipcpi> ni'o cei'e ikla goi'e ko'ai no'e'uno'ai tu'e xe'enai pa lorxu cu noi'e xagji
07:06 < durka42> oi .u'i
07:07 < gleki> i wanted to translate loeb function to Lojban but got lost at the initial stage. how to express "function(arg1,arg2){return arg1+arg2;} ?
07:08 < durka42> lo ka makau sumji ce'u ce'u
07:09 < gleki> no, function itself!
07:09 < gleki> fancu4?
07:09 < Ilmen> en: funksiio
07:09 < durka42> ka creates functions :)
07:09 < Ilmen> en: funtiio
07:09 < akmnlrse> gleki: mi smadi tu'a lu
07:10 < akmnlrse> lo ka lob cu ka fy ry. ce'ai ge fy. boi ry. dunli lo ka pormei ma kau gi ro da poi se pormoi fi fy. zo'u lo pormoi be da bei ry. cu ka ce'u ry. me'au lo pormoi be da bei fy
07:10 < akmnlrse> li'u noi je'u ku'i detklarativa
07:10 < Ilmen> "lo sumji be X bei Y"
07:10 < zipcpi> I think that's just me'ei sumji
07:11 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
07:11 < mensi> funtiio = x1 (plural of ordered pairs) is an exhaustive set (possibly infinite) of inputs/outputs defining a unary
07:11 < mensi> function which yields result x3 when given input x2; x1(x2) = x3 |>>> "f(x) = z" == "fy funtiio xy fi zy". "lo ro se
07:11 < mensi> zilbri be lo ka ce'u sumji ce'u li pa" is a way to extract the input/output set of the relation "f(x) = x−1", so that
07:11 < mensi> you can use it as funtiio's x1. Using a la-name for referring to a function is also an option, for example "la .fankcyn.
07:11 < mensi> cu funtiio li re li ci". See also fancu, fancuka. |>>> Ilmen
07:11 < zipcpi> Then you run the function by taking {lo poi'i ke'a sumji ko'a ko'e}
07:11 < durka42> 3 lojbanists, 4 solutions :)
07:11 < Ilmen> As for the Lojban→Esperanto translation, I'll see if I can do that tomorrow
07:12 < zipcpi> Ugh... I really need to test out the crazy fancylojban stuff I added. Maybe translate a rulebook or a program
07:12 < durka42> vlaste: cu'uxna (n)
07:12 < vlaste> cu'uxna (notes) = To summarize, "x1 chooses x2 out of set x3 to do/have relationship x4 (binary ka)". See also {cuxna}
07:12 < durka42> zipcpi: yes please that would make you at least better than krtisfranks, even if I still disapprove of wasting the cmavo space
07:15 < zipcpi> Hmm... maybe something like Euclid's algorithm for greatest common factor
07:17 < durka42> but challenge yourself to actually use the frameworks you've created, instead of creating any new cmavo along the way :)
07:17 < Ilmen> co'o
07:17 < durka42> that way you can find out if it's sufficient or not
07:18 < zipcpi> Well I'd probably need a few brivla at least
07:18 < durka42> ia nai
07:18 < zipcpi> {ifle} already exists, so that's great. Dunno about "assignment"; I'm not sure how {goi} would work
07:20 < durka42> but that's what I'm saying, if you use the translation as a way to fish for new words to invent, you won't get around to testing the words you already made :p
07:20 < latro`a> try to be careful to distingusih the *algorithm* from the *function*, if you can, when dealing with something like the euclidean algorithm
07:21 < zipcpi> But I didn't create any brivla for programs; only some assignment cmavo
07:21 < latro`a> I understand; that framework would be hard to embed
07:21 < gleki> exp: tu'e i mi mo i do mo tu'e i mo tu'u i mo tu'u
07:21 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "u" found.
07:22 < latro`a> but here's the catch: "k is the greatest common factor of m and n" is already a function
07:23 < gleki> exp: tu'e mi mo i mi mo tu'u
07:23 < mensi> (tu'e [{mi <CU (¹mo VAU¹)>} {i <mi (¹CU [mo VAU]¹)>}] tu'u)
07:23 < zipcpi> The main thing is probably style
07:23 < latro`a> so you'd wind up saying something like "the greatest common factor function is equal to the following recursively defined function ..."
07:23 < zipcpi> {ty ca'egoi by}, or {ko goingau ty fi by
07:23 < zipcpi> }
07:23 < durka42> latro`a: if two functions calculate the same thing from the same inputs, are they the same function?
07:24 < latro`a> as functions, yes
07:24 < latro`a> that's extensionality
07:24 < latro`a> yet they have more structure that we care about, which is why the distinction is important
07:24 < durka42> sure
07:25 < latro`a> there is the related problem, common in graph theory: find *a* solution to this problem
07:25 < latro`a> (for instance, find *a* minimal path from A to B)
07:25 < latro`a> here you can have two algorithms both of which find members of the relation but which define different functions
07:27 < latro`a> hm, I wonder how that would work with ma kau
07:27 < latro`a> you have some predicate {broda} which is satisfied by more than one object, how do we think about {lo ka ma kau broda}?
07:28 < latro`a> does it return all of them?
07:29 < zipcpi> ca'e lo ka {gcd} fa ce'u goi ko'a ce'u goi ko'e cu ka'ei {whileloop} fa lo du'u bo'e na du li no kei lo nu ju'egi ko'a ca'egoi bo'e gi ... OK that didn't go too well
07:30 < zipcpi> Mostly the problem is that it's not like defining a Lojban word in x1~x5 style; the variables themselves are reassigned
07:30 < latro`a> if you write it in tail recursive form it should be simple
07:30 < zipcpi> Oh right
07:31 < latro`a> well, straightforward
07:31 < latro`a> I shouldn't say simple
07:31 < latro`a> it'll look complicated, but it will not actually be complicated
07:33 < durka42> heh
07:33 < latro`a> this also gives a nice way to make up words for common programming idioms
07:34 < latro`a> like f(x)=h(x) if P(x),f(g(x)) otherwise
07:34 < zipcpi> We have {ifle}
07:34 < latro`a> (which, incidentally, is the form of the euclidean algorithm)
07:34 < gleki> can anyone write this all down?
07:35 < zipcpi> gleki: I'm gonna create a page to store my translation attempt
07:35 < zipcpi> Of course now we want a brivla for "Greatest common divisor"
07:35 < zipcpi> After all we are defining *something* :p
07:35 < latro`a> nah, you can define it in terms of the programming idiom
07:35 < latro`a> :p
07:36 < zipcpi> Also the tu'e...tu'u problem that I raised in the mriste is kinda biting me in the butt
07:37 < zipcpi> Cause how else would you include a long algorithm within {ifle}
07:37 < zipcpi> Or whatever brivla for while-loop
07:37 < latro`a> x1 is the output upon application to x2 of the recursive function f, where f(x)=x3(x) if x4(x), else x5(x)
07:38 < zipcpi> Am I just supposed to assume that tu'e...tu'u works the way I want it to to make my life easier
07:38 < latro`a> now x1 is GCD, x2 is the pair of numbers in question, x3 gets the nonzero entry from a pair, x4 checks if a pair has a zero element, and x5 takes the remainder
07:39 < latro`a> *shrug* I never really understood it, frankly
07:39 < latro`a> the syntax is fine
07:39 < latro`a> but the syntax doesn't inform the semantics very well
07:39 < latro`a> unlike most of jbo
07:39 < zipcpi> What, tu'e...tu'u?
07:39 < latro`a> yeah
07:39 < latro`a> at least that's been my experience
07:40 < zipcpi> Well, join the fray: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban/NRUIud_OCj8
07:41 < latro`a> nah, I don't understand it enough to try
07:41 < zipcpi> u'i
07:41 < latro`a> and I've tried several times to understand it
07:41 < latro`a> my inability to understand it is part of why I like this simple-but-verbose style of using functions all over
07:42 < zipcpi> The main thing is that {ifle} takes three arguments, and is very familiar as an "if-else" clause
07:42 < zipcpi> But often you want to include more than one statement within the IF or ELSE block
07:42 < latro`a> sure, haskeller's call the equivalent if'
07:42 < latro`a> *haskellers
07:43 < latro`a> this seems like it would be helped by ju'ei
07:43 < zipcpi> Ah yes, ju'ei
07:43 < zipcpi> I actually mentioned it in that thread
07:43 < latro`a> not that I ever spelled out exactly how ju'ei works in weird scope situations
07:44 < latro`a> I can tell you how it works in NU and NOI
07:44 < latro`a> which is where I wanted it
07:44 < latro`a> but tu'e tu'u? not a chance
07:45 < zipcpi> Right, the problem I see with ju'ei is that it basically means that we have be very aware of how "deep" we're in, and use the correct number of terminators for everything.
07:45 <@xalbo> zipcpi: That's just embedding another {lo nu ifle} as one of the ifle2/ifle3
07:45 < mensi> xalbo: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: {broda pa roi ro jeftu} is indeed a fix. no matter what the phase is it will still be
07:45 < mensi> once a week (unlike paroi lo jeftu). but for {di'i lo jeftu} im not sure. | 2015-07-15T06:10:26.
07:45 < mensi> 330Z
07:45 < zipcpi> It's fine for that Bible example, because the separated bridi are very simple
07:46 < zipcpi> xalbo: Yeah but then we're forced to use {kei ju'e nu} or something
07:46 <@xalbo> Oh, I see.
07:46 < zipcpi> And *also* suffer from the same problem of having to be aware of how deep we're in
07:47 < zipcpi> Not being able to reset anything with a simple {i} or even my {i'au/iau}
07:47 <@xalbo> Functional Lojban is like Lisp, so of course you need to count parens.
07:47 < latro`a> one workaround would be to define the "chunks" and *then* their relation to one another
07:48 < latro`a> ifle fa ko'a lo nu ifle fa ko'e ko'i ko'o kei ko'u
07:48 < latro`a> is not so bad
07:48 < zipcpi> That's not the problem. The problem is if ko'i contains more than one statement
07:49 < zipcpi> Unless we first assign ko'i to something
07:49 < latro`a> that was the point
07:49 < zipcpi> Enter {goi'e}
07:49 < zipcpi> goi'e ko'i tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
07:49 < gleki> eN: goi'e
07:49 < gleki> en: goi'e
07:49 < mensi> goi'e = [COI3] assign tu'e...tu'u group to sumti |>>> goi'i assigns a bridi to a sumti; goi'e assigns an entire tu'e...
07:49 < mensi> tu'u group. May be placed within the group (usually right after tu'e), or right after tu'u. |>>>
07:49 < mensi> spheniscine
07:49 < gleki> in natlangs nesting is solved by declaring new varibles or {la'edi'u}/{go'oi}
07:50 < zipcpi> Actually I changed it so that it works both for bridi and tu'e...tu'u group
07:51 < durka42> I don't see how COI solves that problem anyway
07:51 < durka42> camxes: coi tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
07:51 < camxes> ([coi DOhU] [tu'e {<broda VAU> <i (¹brode VAU¹)>} tu'u])
07:51 < durka42> it doesn't go "inside"
07:51 < gleki> would it be bad if i parse the sentence {mi klama na gi'a mo} as {mi klama na zo'e VAU gi'a mo}?
07:51 < zipcpi> No, it's not supposed to go inside; all it does is associate the tu'e-clause to ko'i
07:51 < durka42> um yes that's bad .u'i
07:52 < durka42> {nagi'a} is one connective
07:52 < gleki> isnt it the same as negating {mi klama} and then adding {gi'a}?
07:52 < zipcpi> .i coi ko'i tu'e broda .i brode tu'u .i brodi
07:52 < zipcpi> exp: .i coi ko'i tu'e broda .i brode tu'u .i brodi
07:52 < mensi> (i [coi ko'i DOhU] [tu'e {<CU (¹broda VAU¹)> <i (¹CU [brode VAU]¹)>} tu'u] [i {CU <brodi VAU>}])
07:52 < durka42> well actually
07:52 < durka42> I guess it is equivalent in that case yeah
07:53 < zipcpi> Works, ga'a mi...
07:53 < latro`a> gleki: in isolation yes, in >2 tails no, afaict
07:53 < gleki> latro`a: je'e
07:53 < zipcpi> Except yes I do admit that COI is a weird choice and accepts things I don't want it to accept
07:53 < latro`a> gi'e ... na gi'a -> ~(p ^ q) v r
07:53 < latro`a> which is not (p ^ ~q) v r
07:54 < zipcpi> CUhE was my preferred choice but doesn't work properly with tu'e...tu'u. Unless we add a {zo'u}, which breaks the symmetry with {cei'e}
07:54 < latro`a> it can also eat a sumti
07:54 < latro`a> which you don't want
07:54 < zipcpi> I want it to eat a sumti. But not a selbri
07:55 < latro`a> but tu'e tu'u is not a sumti
07:55 < latro`a> hence the problem
07:55 < zipcpi> goi'e ko'i tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
07:55 < latro`a> mm
07:55 < durka42> use LAhE for that
07:56 < zipcpi> Well part of these fancylojban stuff is to avoid having to rely on vague-scope co'ephora like {la'e di'e}
07:58 < durka42> no I mean put it in ma'oi LAhE to eat sumti and only sumti
07:58 < zipcpi> exp: la'e ko'i tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
07:58 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "u" found.
07:58 < zipcpi> fliba
07:59 < durka42> exp: la'e ko'i .i tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
07:59 < mensi> ([{la'e ko'i LUhU} VAU] [i {tu'e <(¹CU [broda VAU]¹) (¹i [CU {brode VAU}]¹)> tu'u}])
07:59 < zipcpi> exp: cu'e ko'i zo'u tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
07:59 < mensi> ([{cu'e ko'i} zo'u] [tu'e {<CU (¹broda VAU¹)> <i (¹CU [brode VAU]¹)>} tu'u])
08:00 < zipcpi> Thing is, I want it to work as both {goi'e ko'i broda}, and as {goi'e ko'i tu'e broda .i brode}
08:01 < zipcpi> And I'd much prefer not having to add {.i} or {zo'u} to those constructs to make it work, so as to match {cei'e}
08:02 < zipcpi> Cause {cei'e ilka bo'a broda} and {cei'e ilka tu'e bo'a broda .i bo'e brode} work
08:02 < zipcpi> Ugh leaving out the {tu'u}s
08:02 < zipcpi> cei'e is in SEI
08:02 < durka42> heh well they are elidible I guess
08:03 < durka42> hmm
08:03 <@xalbo> My experience with functional languages was years ago, but isn't part of the point that you pretty much don't need multiple statements in a row? I mean, you need tail recursion and calls to other functions, and that's about it.
08:03 < durka42> if old-SOI were still around... :p
08:03 < zipcpi> u'i
08:03 < zipcpi> GOIhE, same grammar as old-SOI!
08:04 < zipcpi> except no one cares about old-SOI anymore!
08:04 < durka42> xalbo: generally there is still some kind of (do ...) syntax to sequence things
08:04 < durka42> well not the same grammar
08:05 < zipcpi> off: soi ko'a broda
08:05 < mensi> ([soi ko'a SEhU] [broda VAU])
08:05 < zipcpi> exp: soi ko'a broda
08:05 < mensi> ([soi {ko'a <CU (¹broda VAU¹)>} SEhU] VAU)
08:05 < zipcpi> off: soi ko'a tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
08:05 < mensi> ([soi ko'a SEhU] [tu'e {<broda VAU> <i (¹brode VAU¹)>} tu'u])
08:05 < zipcpi> Hey it works
08:05 < zipcpi> off: soi ko'a mi broda
08:05 < mensi> ([soi ko'a mi SEhU] [broda VAU])
08:06 < zipcpi> Oh
08:06 < zipcpi> Yeah that's bad
08:06 < zipcpi> One and only one
08:06 < zipcpi> Bad soi. Bad greedi soi
08:06 < zipcpi> Go home
08:07 < latro`a> xalbo: you don't NEED to, in the sense that if you have purely functional code in multiple statements, you can perform substitution to make it one statement
08:08 < latro`a> the only exception is certain recursive paradigms which can't be directly translated into a form where the function doesn't have a name for itself
08:08 < zipcpi> I've never used a functional language for programming, so I'm just working all these out as I go along
08:08 < latro`a> but in practice it is far more common to split into multiple statements
08:08 < durka42> eventually someone will write a Y combinator in lojban
08:09 < latro`a> hell, haskell's do notation is actually a way of turning something which "shouldn't" be able to split into multiple statements into multiple statements anyway
08:09 < durka42> true
08:09 < durka42> .ei mi cliva
08:09 <@xalbo> I'm trying to write GCD in funtional Lojban, and coming against the fact that I don't remember the GCD algorithm well at all. .oi
08:10 < durka42> .u'i
08:10 < zipcpi> co'o la durka
08:10 < zipcpi> xalbo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_algorithm
08:10 < zipcpi> That's the same thing I was working off from
08:10 < latro`a> take (m,n), n<=m; if n divides m then the result is n; otherwise repeat with (n,m%n)
08:10 < zipcpi> Somewhat similar is the definition for {refkusi}
08:11 <@xalbo> Thanks.
08:11 < latro`a> so given the 5 place brivla I made up earlier, it works out provided you can define (m,n)->(n,m%n)
08:11 < zipcpi> The JVS definition I entered is basically translated off of some fancylojban that tsani wrote. His version used {ce'ai} assignments, and didn't use {ifle}
08:13 < zipcpi> {bo'V}, {ka'ei} and {cei'e} should be sufficient to simplify most uses of {ce'ai} (although part of the trade off is that it only works for one level, so {ce'ai} still has some use.
08:13 < zipcpi> )
08:15  * nuzba @kaleidic: OH: "I'm looking forward to strong AI so I can hear masterpiece lojban rap" [http://bit.ly/1K7rsoR]
08:15 < latro`a> I take a weird sort of pride in seeing my cmavo used in complicated ways, and even replaced with more powerful cmavo
08:15 < latro`a> :)
08:17 <@xalbo> http://pastebin.com/npeLKcWa
08:17 <@xalbo> GCD in functional lojban, with no experimental cmavo at all.
08:18 < zipcpi> Cool
08:18 <@xalbo> Quite possibly some bugs in it, if I have arguments backwards.
08:18 < zipcpi> Hm
08:18 < latro`a> nice
08:18 < latro`a> (of course I think these days it would've been idiomatic to use {ce'ai}, but I see the motivation)
08:19 < latro`a> you might need xor
08:19 <@xalbo> {ga} is "if", {gi} is "else}, {giga} is "else if"
08:19 < latro`a> oh, then don't you want {ga nai}
08:19 < latro`a> ?
08:20 < latro`a> and {gi ga nai}?
08:20 <@xalbo> Oh, i guess it's not "if", really.
08:21 < latro`a> and there is a bug, you want li no in dilcu4
08:21 < latro`a> er nvm
08:21 < latro`a> missed the fo'a in that clause
08:21 < zipcpi> veldilcu: x1 = x2 % x3
08:22 < latro`a> is it the quotient at the end?
08:22 < zipcpi> Yes
08:22 < latro`a> I guess so
08:22 < latro`a> yeah, had to check
08:22 < latro`a> I tend to stop one step later
08:22 < latro`a> when one of the entries is already zero
08:22 < latro`a> err, when one of them is already 1, rather
08:22 <@xalbo> I should have done that; that's what the wikipedia article did. But I basically copied what you said in the channel just now.
08:23 < latro`a> fair point
08:24 < latro`a> I just got turned around by that clause being all dilcu
08:24 <@xalbo> I don't think I did want {ga nai}. "Either (ko'a>ko'a and fo'a is the GCD of ko'e, ko'a) OR ..."
08:24 < latro`a> rather than "if ... return n"
08:24 < latro`a> ah
08:24 < latro`a> so it's not if
08:24 < latro`a> in the way you wrote it
08:24 <@xalbo> Yeah, it actually isn't if.
08:25 < latro`a> you've basically canceled the negations that would've arisen in the "if" formulation
08:26 < zipcpi> {ifle} might be safer, except you have to wrap each clause in an abstraction, then enter {ju'ei} vs {tu'e tu'u} :p
08:26 <@xalbo> There's no return in my model, it's merely conditions under which x1 is the GCD of x2 and x3. The ugly part is that I have to refer to the name {djisidi} in my "definition" of it.
08:26 < latro`a> that's inevitable without a Y combinator
08:26 <@xalbo> (whence the y combinator, but my brain fails at that)
08:27 < latro`a> the Y combinator is actually a problem for certain things; it creates type problems that you may not want to try to deal with
08:27 <@xalbo> {ifle} is just entirely the wrong thing for this, I think. I mean, it's all about {nu} abstractions happening, instead of {du'u} being true.
08:27 <@xalbo> And, I think I just showed that for this purpose, it's not needed. :)
08:27 < zipcpi> I used {ifle} for {du'u} as well
08:27 < zipcpi> Check out my def for {refkusi}
08:27 < latro`a> the english definition of ifle is a bit off
08:28 < latro`a> I know what you intend, it's more or less determined by the arg type
08:28 < latro`a> but your english implies that the arg has to be nu
08:28 < zipcpi> Mhm
08:28 < zipcpi> I did write a Lojban definition for ifle. 100% cmavo
08:29 < zipcpi> ganai me'au bo'a gi me'au bo'e .ije ga me'au bo'a gi me'au bo'i
08:29 < zipcpi> It's almost singable lol
08:30 <@xalbo> Who took the bo'V for what now?
08:31 < zipcpi> I took bo'V for x1~x5, which also autoassigns to ce'u with {ka'ei}
08:32 < latro`a> oh jeez
08:32 < latro`a> ka and ce'ai had a baby
08:32 < zipcpi> Exactly :p
08:32 < latro`a> the cmavo are literally multiplying
08:32 < zipcpi> u'i
08:33 < latro`a> explains why pilji and pinji sound so similar
08:33 < latro`a> (lame joke)
08:33 <@xalbo> u'i
08:35  * nuzba @palkeo: @janJulo mi sama. taso tenpo ni la mi wile kama sona e toki Lojban. mi pilin e ni : toki Epelanto li sama toki Español en toki Français. [http://bit.ly/1O6xeFb]
08:38 < tsani> vlaste: ka'ei
08:38 < vlaste> ka'ei = abstractor: predicate abstractor. x1 is the predicate expressed by [bridi], using bo'a, bo'e, etc for variables.
08:38 < tsani> ah
08:39 < tsani> So many new cmavo these days.
08:39 < zipcpi> u'i
08:39 < zipcpi> I've been pretty naughty with JVS T.T
08:40 < zipcpi> Almost as infamous as Curtis lol
08:40 < tsani> Yep
08:40 < tsani> And every 2nd post on the mailing list is you .u'i
08:40 < zipcpi> u'i
08:41 < zipcpi> And like, I keep replying to my own posts. Soon it'll be discovered that all jbopre are really just me zo'osai
08:42 <@xalbo> You silly jackdaw!
08:42 < latro`a> something about a bard?
08:46 <@xalbo> Nevermind.
08:50 < zipcpi> On {ju'ei}, I have written: experimental-grammar solution #1: {ju'ei}; essentially acts like a tight-scope {.i} that doesn't close sub-clauses. {lo nu broda ju'ei brode}. Has the advantage of not requiring forethought, but has the disadvantage of not automatically closing any bridi tails; if one of your abstraction-bridi happens to contain a lot of nested NU or POI, they must be closed manually.
08:51 < zipcpi> experimental-grammar solution #2: Allow {tu'e...tu'u} to act as a single bridi in NU clauses: {lo nu tu'e broda .i brode tu'u}. Does require forethought, but gives a new "level zero" for {.i} to automatically reset to until closed by {tu'u}.
08:54 < palkeo> hi ! I'm interested in lojban, and I had a question for people who are fluent : what about the saphir-worth hypothesis ? Do you think your way of thinking changed, or that you can think differently in lojban ?
08:55 < palkeo> toki ! sina mute pi toki pona kepeken e toki Lojban li pilin e seme pi sona pi Saphir-Worth ? :)
08:55 < zipcpi> Well, for me, word-choice is the most interesting aspect; breaking down semantic concepts and metaphors and thinking about what I really want to say. Sometimes I even find occassion to add some color to a sentence that would be hard to back-translate to English.
08:56 < zipcpi> One of my favorite translations is this: http://tatoeba.org/eng/sentences/show/4225938
08:56 < palkeo> I learned toki pona, so I have already experienced that way of breaking semantic concepts, BTW :p
08:57 < zipcpi> Ah... Well Lojban does have a different way of doing it
08:58 < palkeo> yeah, it seems so :) I like the unambiguous grammar, and yeah, the emotion words seems really useful
08:58 < gleki> palkeo: some people think that Sapir Whorf hypothesis is an incorrect question. Anyway it was Loglan, not Lojban that should have tested this. But the best proof/disproof of SWH is Guugu Yimitthir language
08:59 < zipcpi> Toki Pona, from what I hear, relies on metaphor to build new concepts, while in Lojban we tend to try to be more specific as to what each word means
08:59 < palkeo> gleki: can you develop on that ?
08:59 < gleki> btw anyone knows what NAI is doing here:
08:59 < gleki> text = expr:(intro_null NAI_clause* 
08:59 < gleki> ...
09:00 < gleki> palkeo: just google that language
09:00 < gleki> That language, not necessarily Lojban says a lot (or nothing) on SWH
09:01 < akmnlrse> gleki: sfosili lo nu pu lo nu pavmeigau ma'oi nai jo'u ma'oi cai cu tadji lo nu curmi lo nu spuda lo zo pei preti
09:01 < akmnlrse> s/sfosili/ve vimcu ja mo kau
09:01 < zipcpi> But one nice thing about Lojban; its vocab basically acts a lot like objects in object oriented programming. If I need a new concept? I just define one like I would new Object :p
09:01 < fenki> akmnlrse meant to say: gleki: ve vimcu ja mo kau lo nu pu lo nu pavmeigau ma'oi nai jo'u ma'oi cai cu tadji lo nu curmi lo nu spuda lo zo pei preti
09:01 < zipcpi> At least for me anyway
09:02 < gleki> akmnlrse: simsa la'oi fragment vau iepei
09:02 < mensi> ba'e mi na tugni
09:02 < gleki> exp: nai
09:02 < mensi> nai
09:02 < akmnlrse> je'u
09:02 < gleki> text = expr:(intro_null NAI_clause* text_part_2 (!text_1 joik_jek)? text_1? faho_clause EOF?) {return _node_nonempty("text", expr);}
09:03 < gleki> zo'oi joik_jek mo
09:03 < akmnlrse> ru'a si'a nu curmi lo nu spuda lo preti
09:03 < akmnlrse> exp: .i je
09:03 < mensi> (i je)
09:04 < akmnlrse> off: .i je
09:04 < mensi> (i je)
09:04 < akmnlrse> cizra
09:05 < zipcpi> It's for je'i / ji
09:05 < zipcpi> I think
09:05 < akmnlrse> gerna: .i je
09:05 < mensi> (0[i je])0
09:06 < zipcpi> {protagonista}? u'i
09:07 < gleki> i just removed both NAI and this joik_jek from alta and ... nothing happened
09:07 < zipcpi> Wait I think I hear something exploding
09:07 < zipcpi> zo'o
09:08 < gleki> new horizons?
09:08 < gleki> butterfly effect detected
09:09 < zipcpi> It's all your fault
09:09 < zipcpi> do po'o malfu'e
09:09 < palkeo> you are doing a parser ?
09:10 < palkeo> zipcpi: yeah, a little like in toki pona, but in toki pona you have to define everything, which is quite… extreme
09:10 < gleki> playing with existing ones
09:10 < gleki> toki: Lojban
09:10 < mensi> lojban = toki Losupan. en la toki pona. taso la toki pona ala
09:10 < palkeo> gleki: thanks for the name of that language, I read an article about it that was really interestand, and I didn't knew about it :)
09:11 < gleki> palkeo: if that story doesnt convince you then *for you* SWH is wrong.
09:11 < zipcpi> "The language is notable for its use of pure geographic directions (north, south, east, west) rather than egocentric directions (left, right, forward, backward),[5] though such "purity" is disputed."
09:11 < zipcpi> Hmm... there's also the Piraha language
09:12 < gleki> some language dont have words for "head"
09:12 < gleki> *languages
09:12 < zipcpi> Which had only two numbers. {so'u} and {so'i}
09:12 < palkeo> gleki: it's interesting, but I don't have an opinion about it for now :)
09:12 < zipcpi> Yep, not even {pa}
09:13 <@xalbo> exp: nai
09:13 < mensi> nai
09:13 < zipcpi> (Translation: only two numbers, "few" and "many". They didn't even have a word for "one")
09:13 < gleki> basic picture textbooks using gestures "I","you" dont work for Guugu Yimitthir.
09:13 <@xalbo> gleki: I suspect it's there so that an answer to {uipei} can be a bare {nai}.
09:13 < gleki> xalbo: yes, akmnrlse already answered
09:13 < palkeo> is there anything interesting related to language processing that was made for lojban ? apart from parsers
09:13 <@xalbo> Ok. didn't see it in backscroll.
09:14 <@xalbo> palkeo: There have been a few random text generators.
09:14 < gleki> a thesis on using Lojban in natural language processing
09:14 < gleki> mentioned somewhere here: mw.lojban.org/papri/Lojban_timeline
09:16 < palkeo> nice
09:17 < palkeo> (it's funny how the smiley may be doing the same job in english as the words to express emotion in lojban… there was a lack of them so smileys were introduced ?)
09:17 < gleki> also Lojban is one of few (may be the only) language where "variable types" have been specified for the whole core vocabulary (mw.lojban.org/papri/La_Bangu:_Lojban_Dictionary_with_Examples)
09:17 < gleki> yes, i suppose smileys appeared since internet allowed for a richer set of typographic symbols
09:18 < gleki> again something related to SWH
09:18 < gleki> typography forced people not to express interjections
09:18 < gleki> now this barrier is somewhat lowered
09:19 < palkeo> yeah
09:20 < palkeo> I didn't understand your variable types message, what is it ?
09:20 < zipcpi> Well you know what I had the darndest time with? "Hm". So many meanings; so many intonations
09:20 < palkeo> you can, like, define something, and then refer specifically to it using a specific word like « this », or something ?
09:21 < zipcpi> Hm? Who are you talking to?
09:21 < palkeo> sorry, internet problem…
09:21 < palkeo> I was contesting to gleki
09:22 < palkeo> about "variable types"
09:22 < gleki> palkeo: about smileys: http://nedroid.com/comics/2014-08-28-beartato-newphone.png
09:23 < palkeo> :)
09:23 < gleki> palkeo: just open this link: mw.lojban.org/papri/La_Bangu:_Lojban_Dictionary_with_Examples Such things as "clause", "entity" are not hard to understand. im not aware of any other similar projects.
09:24 < ldlework> mmm camera juice
09:24 < palkeo> gleki: oh, ok
09:24 < gleki> SWWHish comic actually
09:24 < gleki> SWHish comic actually
09:25 < gleki> palkeo: after you read you ofc. can return and ask more questions so that I improve that page
09:27 < palkeo> ok :)
09:28 < zipcpi> But yeah, the Piraha language: predictably, they sucked at math
09:28 < zipcpi> Though I think now they know about numbers, due to cultural influence
09:30 < zipcpi> Well it says "Being concerned that, because of this cultural gap, they were being cheated in trade, the Pirahã people asked Daniel Everett, a linguist who was working with them, to teach them basic numeracy skills. After eight months of enthusiastic but fruitless daily study with Everett, the Pirahã concluded that they were incapable of learning the material and discontinued the lessons. Not a single Pirahã had learned to count up to ten o
09:30 < zipcpi> r even to add 1 + 1."
09:30 < zipcpi> Dunno how they are now
09:30 < gleki> zipcpi: and they use Spanish for that
09:30 < gleki> zipcpi: just like Guugu Yimitthir use English to express "left/right"
09:30 < zipcpi> They now use Spanish numbers?
09:31 < gleki> are there any hints that numbers are appearing in their language?
09:32 < gleki> even if some particular language is changing that way the general trend are borrowings
09:32 < gleki> E.g. 30% of Quechua words are ... Spanish words.
09:32 < gleki> and Quechua is in no way a rare language
09:33 < zipcpi> I have no idea. Can't find anything that suggests it
09:37 < gleki> the only point guskant may have is that {i} not always resets the 0 level. since {tu'e} overrides that.
09:37 < zipcpi> lu...li'u
09:37 < zipcpi> to...toi
09:38 < zipcpi> And I'm not even sure {iau} works either. It's not meant to be more powerful than {i}
09:41 < zipcpi> In fact {iau} specifically says "I pretend to be .i, then back track, removing the last {vau}"
09:42 < zipcpi> Also the attitudinals thing is just deep magic; ca'e anything that attaches to {iau} attaches to the entire sentence, even though it does not close the sentence
09:44 < gleki> alta: coi
09:44 < mensi> (I [coi DO DOhU] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
09:46 < zipcpi> Grammatically, {iau} acts as {cu'au xi da'a}
09:46 < gleki> off: coi tu'e mi mo tu'u i tu'e u'isai mo
09:46 < mensi> ([coi DOhU] [tu'e {<mi CU> <mo VAU>} tu'u] [i {tu'e <u'i sai>} {mo VAU} TUhU])
09:46 < zipcpi> Attitudinals however, just attach to the entire sentence as if it is {cu'au xi ro}
09:46 < gleki> alta: coi tu'e mi mo tu'u i tu'e u'isai
09:46 < mensi> ([I {coi DO DOhU} {tu'e <I (¹FA mi¹) (¹CU [mo VAU]¹)> tu'u}] [i {tu'e <u'i sai>} {I <FA ZOhE> <CU (¹COhE VAU¹)>} TUhU])
09:46 < gleki> now i wonder if what alta outputs is desirable
09:49 < zipcpi> alta: ki'ai
09:49 < mensi> (I [ki'ai DO DOhU] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
09:49 < zipcpi> ki'ai do
09:49 < zipcpi> sa'ei do
09:49 < zipcpi> ci'oi do
09:50 < zipcpi> Though I don't know what bare COI2 is good for anyway lol
09:50 < zipcpi> And bare COI3 is probably even less useful
09:51 < gleki> selmaho:coi3
09:51 < mensi> cmavo: goi'e, jo'au
09:51 < gleki> en: goi'e
09:51 < mensi> goi'e = [COI3] assign tu'e...tu'u group to sumti |>>> goi'i assigns a bridi to a sumti; goi'e assigns an entire tu'e...
09:51 < mensi> tu'u group. May be placed within the group (usually right after tu'e), or right after tu'u. |>>>
09:51 < mensi> spheniscine
09:52 < gleki> O_0
09:52 < durka42> jo'au do'u = ko smadi lo du'u makau gentufa lo se cusku be mi
09:52 < zipcpi> ka'e ku tu'ai jo'au la tokpona li'u zo'o
09:53 < zipcpi> jo'au la itku'ile
09:53 < zipcpi> jo'au lo u zei bangu
09:53 < zipcpi> uuuuuuuuuuuuuu
09:53 < durka42> ithkuil: itku'ile
09:53 < ithkuil> itku’ile: P1S1/DYN-tk-DFF-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-RPS-IFL/UNFRAMED
09:56 < zipcpi> va'o tu'ai jo'au u zei bangu li'u no da ka'e se pilno fi lo ka cnegau le ve tavla
09:57 < zipcpi> uuuuuuuu
09:57 < zipcpi> na'i na'i na'i na'i na'i
09:58 < zipcpi> xo'ezo'e cau'a co'e do'e ku ge'ecau'i
10:01 < zipcpi> exp: ja'a ja na
10:01 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "a" found.
10:01 < zipcpi> exp: pu ja ca
10:01 < mensi> ([{pu <ja ca>} KU] VAU)
10:03 < zipcpi> ua mi pu jifsku .i mi ja'a se runbau lo drata .i ri me la u zei bangu
10:03 < zipcpi> .iku'i la'a na se pilno fi tu'a le spofu fonxa kelci'e
10:11 < VENOS> Hey
10:18 < Ilmen> coi
10:19 < ldlework> a'oi
11:07  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: @hueruhijiki なきにしもあらずやな http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Hebrew_orthography [http://bit.ly/1M6b8UB]
14:25 < ctefaho> co'o rodo
14:50 < Amnadya> mensi: doi ctefaho http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/na-as-tag-re-visited
14:50 < mensi> Amnadya: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.ctefaho.gy. di'a cusku da
14:51 < Amnadya> mensi: doi zipcpi http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/na-as-tag-re-visited
14:51 < mensi> Amnadya: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.zipcpi.gy. di'a cusku da
14:51 < Amnadya> za'a smaji cacra li so'o
14:54 <@xalbo> Huh, that's interesting.
14:56 <@xalbo> So is the idea something a bit like {kau} in its focus? {na mi citka lo plise} and {mi citka na lo plise} would be truth conditionally equivalent, but with differing emphases?
14:57 < Amnadya> Possibly.
15:01 < Ilmen> Wouldn't {na mi je do} be { na [ mi je do ] }?
15:03 <@xalbo> Hmm, probably. Really, I'm not sure how to fix that either way.
15:03 < ctefaho> Amnadya: So na as a prefix huh
15:04 < Amnadya> Wild pokemon appearing left and right.
15:04 < Amnadya> But that's a good point, Ilmen. I expected something like that...
15:04 < Amnadya> (needing a terminator)
15:04 <@xalbo> The problem is that in CLL Lojban there are distinct connectives for termsets (pe'ejeks} and sumti {eks}. If you combine them both, I'm not sure how you fix that.
15:04 < Ilmen> How about it being a NAhE?
15:05 < Ilmen> sei pensi
15:05 < Amnadya> NAhE[BO] ko'a needs a terminator, too
15:05 < Ilmen> jetnu
15:05 <@xalbo> I mean, the same thing happens with {du'o mi .e do} vs {du'o mi pe'eje do}.
15:05 < Amnadya> But this is why I submit my stuff for peer review here first :)
15:06 < Amnadya> (as opposed to having it forever in a mriste archive)
15:06 < ctefaho> Coincidently I already have a sumti-prefix idea in mind
15:06 < Amnadya> mensi: do bebna
15:06 < mensi> xu do ka'e smusku la'e di'u se pi'o lo drata valsi
15:07 < Amnadya> go'i .i lo ni do snada lo te finti cu cmalu
15:07 < ctefaho> Except it is built upon the corpse of the old quantification and scoping system
15:07 < Ilmen> la mensi cu gasnu mo'oi rinka be lo nu do jinvi lo duu vo'a bebna
15:07 < ctefaho> not gonna like that part I expect
15:07 < Amnadya> na benji lo mi notci
15:07 < Ilmen> je'e
15:08 < Amnadya> I see two options: 1) NA is automatically short-scope. 2) A terminator.
15:08 < ctefaho> I have tinkered so much I don't know where to start
15:09 < ctefaho> should probably come back when all is laid out.
15:09 < Ilmen> First of all, how is called your language? zo'o ru'e
15:09 <@xalbo> Again, it really has nothing to do with NA; the same issue affects any tag with connectives.
15:09 < Amnadya> Of course, but with tags it's intended.
15:09 < Amnadya> This NA wouldn't be a normal tag
15:10 < Ilmen> I also wonder where to add FA
15:10 < ctefaho> how about making a new negator
15:10 < Ilmen> fi na mi je do?  na fi mi je do?
15:10 < Amnadya> It's like short-scope NAHE+BO
15:10 < ctefaho> not part of NA
15:10 < ctefaho> let's call it no'oi'oi
15:11 < Amnadya> NA has always been its own selma'o anyway
15:11 < ctefaho> so have FAhA
15:11 < ctefaho> /PU
15:12 < Amnadya> :/
15:12 <@xalbo> no'uei
15:12 < ctefaho> don't expect many to want them to expand differently than a BAI
15:12  * xalbo runs yuei.
15:12 < ctefaho> a sane BAI*
15:12 < Ilmen> .ai mi cilce tolcanci
15:13 < Amnadya> mi pu kanpe lo nu do xa'o sipna
15:13 < Amnadya> .i la'a la samcinki cu badzga lo se .irci
15:14 < Ilmen> .u'i do kanpe certu
15:14 < Amnadya> .u'i
15:15 < ctefaho> as for my sudden return I was talking with mensi about gismu etymology when I suddenly got a message
15:15 < Ilmen> ǐe la mensi na bi'ai gubni ke notci jungau
15:15 < Ilmen> ba'a nai ru'e
15:15 < Amnadya> mi na pu djuno
15:16 < Ilmen> .ai cipra
15:16 < Ilmen> mensi: doi menli ko prije lo ka si'abzu
15:16 < mensi> Ilmen: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.menli.gy. di'a cusku da
15:17 < ctefaho> ɂI mi Cìkre lo Gìsmu noị ki Spòfu
15:17 < Amnadya> ma gismu gi'e spofu
15:17 < menli> Yeah, it gave me the message privately
15:17 < menli> when I talked to it privately
15:17 < Amnadya> je'e skepre
15:18 < ctefaho> you want the list?
15:18 < Amnadya> ma mupli
15:18 < Amnadya> gi'e pa mei
15:18 < Amnadya> #trappedinlogic
15:18 < Amnadya> .i sa'e ko cusku pa mupli
15:19 < ctefaho> http://pastebin.com/aa3ju2Wm
15:19 < samcinki> zo stika spofu lo ka mi jimpe tau ce
15:19 < clakre> mi pu zi cfasanji lo du'u la .Amnadya. du la .selpahi.
15:19 < ctefaho> +1 on np amount forgot to increment after adding kanpe
15:21 < ctefaho> repeat after me: [jetɁnu] is bad
15:21 < Amnadya> ma cusku lo'u jet.nu le'u
15:22 < ctefaho> upload me a sample on soundcloud where you say [jetnu] and nothing else in between t and n
15:22 < ctefaho> and only [t] and [n] no cheating
15:23 < ctefaho> clakre can back me on this I believe
15:23 < menli> That's pretty easy: don't release the [t] and begin nazalizing
15:23 < clakre> no, I never heard what you heard, ctefaho
15:23 < ctefaho> uhm
15:24 < Amnadya> The [t] is released nasaly
15:24 < ctefaho> I thought you conceded about "a small denpa-bu in there"?
15:24 < clakre> I only made statements predicated on "*if* there is a denpa-bu in there"
15:24 < clakre> yes
15:24 < clakre> and I said that
15:24 < menli> co'o ro do
15:24 < clakre> if there was a small one in there, then the gramatically significant denpa-bu would be a larger one
15:24 < clakre> that was my position.
15:25 < ctefaho> "released nasally"?
15:26 < Amnadya> Yes
15:26 < ctefaho> and that means? nasalization?
15:26 < Amnadya> The "explosion" you feel is in your nose, not your glottis.
15:27 < Amnadya> [tⁿn] IPA
15:28 < Amnadya> There is no glottal stop. You can feel your throat with your hand
15:29 < ctefaho> ⁿ is a symbol for what?
15:29 < ctefaho> can't find
15:29 < Amnadya> nasalized release
15:29 < ctefaho> ah
15:29 < ctefaho> found it
15:30 < ctefaho> and jetnu with ⁿ ?
15:30 < ctefaho> ...
15:30 < ctefaho> without
15:30 < Amnadya> Also possible
15:31 < ctefaho> how exactly?
15:31 < ctefaho> (low on battery may dissapear)
15:34 < Amnadya> It's "normal" to use a nasal release. You could probably insert a voiceless vowel between {t} and {n}
15:34 < Amnadya> But Lojban also allows full buffer vowels
15:34 < Amnadya> Then you can simply release orally
15:35 < ctefaho> I still want my [jetnu]
15:36 < ctefaho> like I have my [jetmu]
15:36 < Amnadya> Do you mean to say that you don't want [tⁿ] as an allophone of /t/ in Lojban?
15:37 < ctefaho> I want you to tell me you can do /tn/
15:37 < ctefaho> because I can in no way say jetnu like I can say jetmu
15:37 < Amnadya> I can do it without release.
15:38 < ctefaho> I would like to hear that
15:38 < Amnadya> It's common in Thai or Korean
15:39 < ctefaho> the only way I can simulate it is to very quickly catch up with the nu
15:39 < ctefaho> but still a pause in-between
15:40 < ctefaho> In any cause I need to go now
15:40 < ctefaho> sipna-time
15:40 < Amnadya> Me too.
15:40 < ctefaho> co'o then
15:42  * nuzba @ligervision: @Fnxtx @evanmcm what is lojban for "artist" or "love"? I'm interested cuz Wittgenstein worked on an exact phil lang & decided it's all games [http://bit.ly/1DhN7CY]
15:43 < Amnadya> Good old Ludwig
15:47 < Amnadya> co'o
16:21 < zipcpi> {tu'e lo mabla cu fasnu .i lo zabna cu fasnu tu'u ca lo nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e} - how to fix for standard Lojban?
16:21 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.Amnadya.gy.: http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/na-as-tag-re-visited | 2015-07-15T21:51:05.
16:21 < mensi> 672Z
16:21 < zipcpi> Oh haha my {ja'a ja na} thing. Well, that's kinda why I added {cau'a} and {cau'i}
16:23 < zipcpi> {cau'i} particularly, would be like *{ja'ai ja cu'i ja nai}, except you can't connect NAI/CAI...
16:27 < zipcpi> But yeah exercising fancylojban would be interesting, since that's supposed to be Lojban's strength. Formal algorithms like computer programs, and maybe less formal algorithms like cookbooks or game rules
16:30 < janKulisa> .i coi rodo mi'e .kristan.
16:31 < zipcpi> Huh the NAJA thing is interesting. Specifically it's been noted that using NAJA is a bit unnerving, like "blablabla NOT! or blablabla"
16:32 < zipcpi> With "NOT!" being the slang usage, where someone makes a statement, then negates it
16:32 < zipcpi> With the logical gardenpathing being intentional
16:33 < zipcpi> But with NAJA, we're basically asking Lojbanists to use the logical gardenpath
16:33 < zipcpi> For something other than a humorous usage
16:34 < janKulisa> but tokiponans are used to that.
16:36 < janKulisa> conditional phrases are at the beginning of the sentence, and ends with "la"
16:36 < zipcpi> (by the way I think the CLL or maybe the wave lessons translated slang NOT as like {mi broda do *nakusai!*}, but that breaks with the right-scoping {na} proposal. With {i'au/iau} though; {mi broda do iau naisai!} might work ({mi broda do vau naisai} in standard grammar)
16:37 < janKulisa> so it sounds like a normal sentence at first, and then is conditional...
16:37 < zipcpi> Exactly...
16:37 < janKulisa> what's "i'au"?
16:38 < zipcpi> Reset bridi level to zero, so auto inserts terminators to return to the top level sentence. Also, deep magic, as in any attitudinals attached to {i'au} get attached to the entire sentence
16:39 < zipcpi> So I expect NAI/CAI to also work
16:39 < janKulisa> "iau" isn't a legal combination, is it?
16:39 < zipcpi> It is, at least now. Dunno about before
16:40 < zipcpi> Basically iau is treated as semivowel i + au dipthong
16:40 < zipcpi> ia isn't considered a diphthong anymore under this model
16:40 < zipcpi> It's semivowel i + vowel a
16:40 < janKulisa> whatever...
16:41  * zipcpi shrugs
16:42 < zipcpi> There was a phonotactic reform a while back, which obsoleted *{versio} in favor of {versiio}
16:42 < zipcpi> And, a bit more controversially, also affects cmevla
16:42 < janKulisa> two vowels in one syllable (regardless of whether you call one a semivowel) is a diphthong in my book.
16:44 < zipcpi> The point is that i and u are semivowels (/j/ and /w/) when they start a syllable, and are treated differently by the reformed morphology
16:44 < janKulisa> sounds like there's too much reforming going on. when are y'all gonna get your act together?
16:45 < zipcpi> Yeah well, I get that a lot; but I'm not responsible for this reform
16:46 < zipcpi> I was taking a hiatus whan that reform happened
16:47 < zipcpi> And... well, I don't remember how the old morphology worked, but I remember there were some confusing/uncertain bits on what should be a valid zi'evla or not, and treating iV and uV as diphthongs was part of the problem
16:47 < zipcpi> Thus pe'i it's a needed reform
16:47 < janKulisa> well, it's gotta stabilise sometime, if it's gonna make it in the long run.
16:48 < zipcpi> I think morphology is stabilized now... a'o
16:48 < janKulisa> can't keep changing it like that forever!
16:49 < zipcpi> Except maybe *additions* that won't break old stuff, like *{muvdyga}
16:51 < zipcpi> I think it's like, take *{zdurio}
16:51 < zipcpi> If {io} is a diphthong, it "should" be a lujvo... zdu/rio
16:52 < zipcpi> Except rio is not a rafsi
16:52 < zipcpi> And we're not sure we want to make it a legal rafsi
16:53 < zipcpi> What's more, glides after consonants are known to be targets of "assimilation" in fast speech
16:53 < zipcpi> Like *{versio} might become {verco}
16:54 < zipcpi> So that might not be desirable for the same reason we don't mix voiced obstruents with unvoiced obstruents, like *{pofgau}
16:54 < janKulisa> sounds likely.
16:57 < zipcpi> I think there needs to be a page on the morphological reform; what it changes, why it was done
16:57 < janKulisa> well, yeah
16:57 < zipcpi> That way I can just point everyone who asks about it to it
16:58 < zipcpi> I'd write it myself but I wasn't involved in it so I fear I won't have a complete understanding of the justification
16:58 < janKulisa> if you're gonna change things around, at least have a page so we can figure out what's going on!
16:58 < zipcpi> :p
17:00 < janKulisa> trying to learn a language that keeps changing is frustrating!
17:07 < zipcpi> Yeah well, I sincerely apologize. I have pretty mabla tinkering tendencies myself. Heck that's even why I formed the joke group, {la bauspo fazykamni}
17:08 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/bauspo_fazykamni/en
17:09 < janKulisa> afk
17:09 < zipcpi> je'e
17:11 < zipcpi> But yeah it's funny, being one that took a hiatus, you'd think I'd be against these reforms. But I took to it like a fish to water... thing is I understand the new morphology well enough for general usage. I don't understand the old morphology
17:11 < zipcpi> I just entered stuff into JVS and see what sticks
17:12 < zipcpi> Mainly because stuff like, is {versio} a lujvo or a zi'evla
17:12 < zipcpi> I don't even know how to begin untangling that
17:13 < zipcpi> vlaste: zivlo (gimka)
17:13 < vlaste> zo zivlo gimkamsmikezypro zo zivle noi catni gismu .i zo zivlo gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
17:15 < zipcpi> vlaste: zevlo (gimka)
17:15 < vlaste> zo zevlo gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo zevlo gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
17:25 < janKulisa> .i mi bilga lenu jukpa
17:29 < zipcpi> {lo} is prefered there... {mi bilga le nu jukpa} implies there is a particular "cooking" event that you are obligated to, not just "I have to cook"
17:29 < janKulisa> there is
17:30 < janKulisa> it's this particular dinner.
17:30 < zipcpi> Well, I just find {le} a bit weird for "irrealis" uses
17:30 < zipcpi> Like I'd use {ca le cabdei} or {ca le nu jukpa}, but I'd avoid {mi djica le nu jukpa}
17:31 < janKulisa> but it's consistently used in L4B, so I'm in the habit.
17:31 < zipcpi> Yeah
17:31 < zipcpi> Well part of it is what is known as "xorlo". Yep, yet another reform, but quite a popular one
17:32 < zipcpi> And doesn't change grammar
17:32 < zipcpi> Basically {lo} no longer represents {da poi}, but is a completely generic "selbri to sumti" converter
17:33 < zipcpi> Thus can stand in for both realis and irrealis objects
17:34 < janKulisa> I read about xorlo,
17:34 < zipcpi> But part of it is that you'd see {lo NU} a lot more than {le NU} these days
17:34 < janKulisa> but habit is habit :-)
17:34 < zipcpi> :p
17:36 < janKulisa> tokipona reform seems to mostly consist in adding new words; not much grammatical stuff.
17:36 < zipcpi> The thing is though, Tokipona doesn't care about syntactic ambiguity :p
17:36 < janKulisa> if we get too many new words, though, we'll lose the whole point...
17:37 < zipcpi> Hm
17:37 < janKulisa> that it doesn't!
17:37 < janKulisa> much to my frustration sometimes...
17:39 < janKulisa> just today I was having a discussion about whether "mi lukin e ilo open mi" could mean "I'm looking for my keys"
17:39 < janKulisa> trouble is,
17:40 < janKulisa> it already means "I see my keys".
17:40 < janKulisa> and if I see them, I don't need to look for them!
17:40 < janKulisa> ya know?
17:41 < zipcpi> Yeah
17:41 < zipcpi> No word for "search"?
17:42 < janKulisa> not really; jan Kipo suggests "alasa"
17:42 < janKulisa> "to hunt" or "to gather"
17:42 < zipcpi> Interesting
17:43 < janKulisa> and since he's the tp guru, or something...
17:43 < zipcpi> Haha... I don't know tokipona
17:44 < janKulisa> but every time I speak toki pona or Esperanto, it takes all my willpower
17:44 < janKulisa> to NOT start sentences with .i
17:45 < clakre> .i mi lernas la Esperanton, sed mi nelci la lojban
17:45 < janKulisa> it's so addictive :-D
17:46 < clakre> cxu vi auxskultis "za'o"?
17:46 < clakre> (I'm not actually conversational in lojban yet...)
17:46 < janKulisa> clakre: jes
17:48 < zipcpi> Haha I don't know tokipona or esperanto, but Lojban tends to get mixed up with Malay in my mind
17:49 < janKulisa> .i ro lo jan lawa cu nasa!
17:50 < clakre> hehe I don't know the tp
17:50 < janKulisa> "jan li sama kala. kala suli li alasa e kala lili."
17:50 < clakre> so what *does* the toki pona verse mean...?
17:51 < janKulisa> I don't remember all of it at the moment...
17:51 < janKulisa> the just-quoted line means:
17:52 < janKulisa> "people are just like fish. Big fish hunt little fish."
17:53 < clakre> aha, neat.  And I knew "lili", so now I know kala and suli
17:53 < janKulisa> pona!
17:54 < janKulisa> if you pm me your email adress I'll try to translate the whole verse for you
17:54 < janKulisa> I promise not to spam :-)
17:55 < janKulisa> and I've already translated the chorus
17:55 < janKulisa> or "hook", as they call it.
17:55 < janKulisa> clakre: ^^
17:56 < clakre> je'e
17:56 < zipcpi> I'm still wondering what would be a good brivla for "while-loop"
17:56 < janKulisa> I don't know what that is.
17:56 < zipcpi> Also do-while
17:56 < zipcpi> Oh, programming constructs
17:56 < janKulisa> that was my guess.
17:57 < zipcpi> That also might be useful for informal algorithms, like instructional texts
17:57 < janKulisa> I don't do programming.
17:57 < zipcpi> It's kinda on my mind these days. "fancylojban"
17:58 < zipcpi> Like {ifle}
17:59 < zipcpi> Well it's probably doable by defining them in terms of recursion
18:00 < janKulisa> yay for recursion :-P
18:00 < zipcpi> Well, part of it is that if one can learn how programming constructs can be used informally like in cookbooks or game rules, maybe that would make it easier for one to learn programming
18:01 < janKulisa> maybe.
18:03 < zipcpi> {fancylojban} is {fancu} + Lojban. But the similarity to English "fancy" has been noted :p
18:04 < janKulisa> I forget what fancu means...
18:04 < zipcpi> function
18:04 < zipcpi> x1 is a function/single-valued mapping from domain x2 to range x3 defined by expression/rule x4.
18:05 < zipcpi> Hmm... mathmatical function... might need a new word for programming function
18:06 < janKulisa> I don't concern myself with either.
18:07 < zipcpi> I might try translating some game rules one of these days, just to test it out
18:09  * nuzba @fsiefken: @rachidalm thx! thought about something similar today: better     reading comprehension with socalled "regular grammar" (esperanto &      lojban) [http://bit.ly/1LkhE9v]
18:09 < zipcpi> I think programming functions are just either {ko [brivla] [arguments]}, or {[return value] [brivla] [arguments]}, with {sumji} being an example of the latter
18:10 < zipcpi> With the brivla themselves being defined *within* the program
18:10 < zipcpi> It's why I created {zai'e} and {cei'e}
18:11 < zipcpi> {zai'e} basically gives infinite space for algorithms to define brivla
18:12 < zipcpi> And allows one to use any evocative name for it
18:12 < zipcpi> Redefine a gismu, build a lujvo, whatever
18:13 < janKulisa> volapukaĵo
18:13 < janKulisa> al mi
18:16 < zipcpi> Oh I believe you were asking the other day about irrational emotions?
18:16 < zipcpi> I'm thinking it's {ro'enai}
18:17 < zipcpi> Or {ro'ene'e} possibly, not sure what is meant by "mindless"
18:17 < janKulisa> I thought about that, and wondered if that would do it...
18:17 < janKulisa> "Please connect charger" x.X
18:18 < zipcpi> I do kinda want to promote {ne'e} over {nai} for polar-negation of attitudinals, but it being disyllabic is a problem
18:18 < zipcpi> In CKTJ I experimentally swapped it with {tei}
18:19 < janKulisa> cktj iru feken...
18:19 < zipcpi> I don't know what that means
18:19 < janKulisa> you don
18:20 < janKulisa> 't want to
18:20 < zipcpi> Haha
18:20 < janKulisa> stupid phone
18:20 < janKulisa> .i le mi skami finxa cu bebna
18:20 < zipcpi> fonxa?
18:21 < janKulisa> fonxa
18:21 < zipcpi> Heh... yeah I defined {samfonxa}
18:21 < janKulisa> but I can't type cuz of my stupidphine
18:21 < janKulisa> *stupidphone
18:23 < zipcpi> And yeah CKTJ is probably one of those crazy reforms that you were complaining about, but hey, think of it as being a place for all of us zbusufukai prenu to let off some steam :p
18:23 < janKulisa> gotta go eat dinner
18:23 < zipcpi> OK
18:23 < janKulisa> co'o
18:23 < zipcpi> co'o
18:25 < Envigado> co'o = bye=
18:25 < Envigado> ?
18:25 < zipcpi> Yes
18:26 < Envigado> ah
18:33 < noncomcinse> coi
18:33 < zipcpi> coi
18:35 < noncomcinse> do mo
18:35 < noncomcinse> doi la zipcpi
18:35 < zipcpi> mi kanro .i mi pensi tu'a me zo tu'e je lo drata poi simsa
18:36 < noncomcinse> .i pa da cmavo ma'oi tu'e
18:36 < zipcpi> mi djuno
18:36 < noncomcinse> .i ma drata
18:36 < noncomcinse> gi'e simsa
18:36 < zipcpi> .y. sampla simsa
18:36 < noncomcinse> ua je'e
18:37 < zipcpi> algoritmi
18:37 < zipcpi> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban/NRUIud_OCj8
18:39 < noncomcinse> je'e zy
18:39 < noncomcinse> .i mi pluja cinmo pensi
18:40 < noncomcinse> .i ku'i paunai ma poi cinmo ki na pluja
18:44 < noncomcinse> .i nandu dukse
18:50 < noncomcinse> co'o ru'e .i .au sai ku'i di'a .irci ca lo cabycte
18:51 < zipcpi> ei la dzapre cu ciska lo kibypapri poi ve ciksi tu'a le cnino vlaturge'a .i mi raunaiva'e se slabu le krinu ja le nu casnu
19:23 < zipcpi> zantufa: ca lo nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e tu'e lo zabna cu fasnu .i lo mabla cu fasnu tu'u
19:23 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "u" cu se tolcri
19:23 < zipcpi> zantufa: ca lo nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e kei tu'e lo zabna cu fasnu .i lo mabla cu fasnu tu'u
19:23 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "u" cu se tolcri
19:24 < zipcpi> exp: ca le nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e kei ju'egi lo zabna cu fasnu gi lo mabla cu fasnu
19:24 < mensi> ([ca {le <nu (¹mi [CU {stuvi'e <le sralygu'e KU> VAU}]¹) kei> KU}] [CU {ju'e gi} {<lo zabna KU> <cu (¹fasnu VAU¹)>} gi {<lo mabla KU> <cu (¹fasnu VAU¹)>} VAU])
19:25 < zipcpi> zantufa: gi lo zabna cu fasnu gi lo mabla cu fasnu gi'i ca le nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e
19:25 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [,] .i ku'i "s" cu se tolcri
19:25 < zipcpi> zantufa: gi lo zabna cu fasnu gi lo mabla cu fasnu
19:25 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [,] .i ku'i "f" cu se tolcri
19:26 < zipcpi> zantufa: ju'egi lo zabna cu fasnu gi lo mabla cu fasnu gi'i ca le nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e
19:26 < zantufa1> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [,] .i ku'i "s" cu se tolcri
19:26 < zipcpi> zantufa: ju'egi lo zabna cu fasnu gi lo mabla cu fasnu
19:26 < zantufa1> ([ju'e gi] [{lo zabna KU} cu {fasnu VAU}] [gi {lo mabla KU} cu {fasnu VAU}] GIhI)
19:26 < zipcpi> xy'y
19:27 < zipcpi> exp: tu'e lo zabna cu fasnu .i lo mabla cu fasnu tu'u sei ca lo nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e
19:27 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "s" found.
19:27 < zipcpi> exp: tu'e lo zabna cu fasnu .i lo mabla cu fasnu tu'u sei ca lo nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e cu co'e
19:27 < mensi> (tu'e [{<lo zabna KU> <cu (¹fasnu VAU¹)>} {i <lo mabla KU> <cu (¹fasnu VAU¹)>}] tu'u [sei {<ca (¹lo [nu {mi <CU (²stuvi'e [le sralygu'e KU] VAU²)>} KEI] KU¹)> cu} co'e SEhU])
19:28 < zipcpi> Ugh
19:28 < zipcpi> fegli
19:30 < zipcpi> off: tu'e lo zabna cu fasnu .i lo mabla cu fasnu tu'u sei ca lo nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e cu co'e
19:30 < mensi> (tu'e [{<(¹lo zabna KU¹) cu> <fasnu VAU>} {i <(¹lo mabla KU¹) cu> <fasnu VAU>}] tu'u [sei {<ca (¹lo [nu {<mi CU> <stuvi'e (²le sralygu'e KU²) VAU>} KEI] KU¹)> cu} co'e SEhU])
19:56 < noncomcinse> coi
19:56 < noncomcinse> selma'o: xoi
19:56 < mensi> .i lu xoi li'u cmavo zo'oi XOI
19:56 < mensi> cmavo: xoi
19:56 < noncomcinse> famyma'o: xoi
19:56 < noncomcinse> camxes: xoi
19:56 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
19:56 < noncomcinse> camxes: broda xoi brode
19:56 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
19:56 < noncomcinse> exp: xoi
19:56 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] but "i" found.
19:57 < noncomcinse> sa'ei.xm.
20:02 < noncomcinse> camxes: ia nai bu
20:02 < camxes> (ia [{nai bu} BOI] VAU)
20:02 < noncomcinse> camxes: iabunaibu
20:02 < camxes> ([{<ia bu> <nai bu>} BOI] VAU)
20:02 < noncomcinse> camxes: ia zei nai bu
20:02 < camxes> ([{ia <zei nai> bu} BOI] VAU)
20:03 < noncomcinse> camxes: ia zei nai
20:03 < camxes> ([{ia <zei nai>}] VAU)
20:57 < zipcpi> Is it bad if I think I can find some use for Curtis' {zai'e}? I don't like the selma'o XOhEhOhE though; I won't know how it's meant to be defined
20:57 < zipcpi> Kinda just wish {me'o lo'o} was grammatical
21:00 < zipcpi> Well I probably won't mind it being CVV'VV or even trisyllabic
21:01 < zipcpi> Not gonna be used that often. But I have the idea of a Zendo-style game bouncing around... I heard that is usually done with sentences in Lojban though, not strings
21:02 < zipcpi> But ugh, I tried playing a web Zendo game once. I simply couldn't keep up.
21:02 < zipcpi> Couldn't compete
21:15 < zipcpi> But yeah I've been pretty abusive toward JVS. I kinda treat words like some politicians treat some legislation - "We have to define it in order to figure out what it means and how it should be used"
21:15 < zipcpi> :p
21:17 < zipcpi> exp: na ro da zvati
21:17 < mensi> ([{na KU} {ro BOI} da] [CU {zvati VAU}])
21:17 < zipcpi> off: na ro da zvati
21:17 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "z" found.
21:17 < zipcpi> cizra
21:19 < noncomcinse> zipcpi: s/na/fi'o xo'i na/
21:19 < fenki> noncomcinse thinks zipcpi meant to say: off: fi'o xo'i na ro da zvati
21:19 < zipcpi> u'i
21:20 < noncomcinse> doi la fenki coi ri .i ua do xa
21:20 < zipcpi> http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/na-as-tag-re-visited
21:20 < noncomcinse> si plixau
21:20 < noncomcinse> .i'e
22:20 < zipcpi> zantufa: ge ganai me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'e gi'i giga me'au ko'a gi me'au ko'i
22:20 < zantufa1> (CU [ge {<ga nai> <me'au ko'a MEhU> <gi (¹me'au ko'e MEhU¹)> gi'i} {gi <ga (¹me'au ko'a MEhU¹) (¹gi [me'au ko'i MEhU]¹) GIhI>} GIhI] VAU)
22:33 < zipcpi> zantufa: ga gi ca gi pu gi ba
22:33 < zipcpi> oi
22:34 < zipcpi> netspliti
22:34 < zipcpi> k: netspliti
22:34 < mensi> (CU [Z:netspliti VAU])
22:38  * nuzba @la_taun: le cizra flira ku srana lu "gunka" li'u #lojban http://t.co/FudccYHWZL [http://bit.ly/1V5R3Sj]
22:40 < zipcpi> Hm if I ever decide to get a pet parser of my own I might actually call it the maltufa, just because lol
22:41 < zipcpi> Well it might be mabla in the sense that it might actually come with... options
22:42 < zipcpi> * enable CKTJ
22:42 < zipcpi> * enable crazy proposal XYZ
22:42 < isd> .i coi rodo
22:42 < zipcpi> coi
22:43 < isd> .i doi la zipcpi mo
22:43 < zipcpi> silder: Do you think destroying Lojban is a good idea? NO DON'T DO IT <----------------> YES DO IT NOW
22:44 < zipcpi> zo'osai
22:45 < zipcpi> I don't know PEG though
22:45 < zipcpi> mi no'aiva'ei certu la .peg.
22:47 < zipcpi> isd: xu do se cmene lo drata poi mi se slabu
22:52 < zipcpi> exp: ge puku gi ca
22:52 < mensi> ([ge {pu ku} gi {ca KU}] VAU)
22:54 < zipcpi> Ah I know. Everytime you click the {ko bauspo} button, it will swap two randomly selected cmavo!
22:55 < zipcpi> Heck there might even be an option to do it secretly; see if you can figure out which cmavo got swapped! The game fun for the whole family!
22:56 < zipcpi> la tcekitauspo kelci'e
22:56 < isd> zipcpi: Not totally sure what you're asking; "am I new here"?
22:56 < zipcpi> I'm asking if I know you by another name
22:58 < zipcpi> "Do I know you by another name?"... if you're new to Lojban though I can see how that sentence is a little hard to parse; it messes with word order in a way that's strange for English :p
22:59 < zipcpi> true/false: you are-named some-other-thing that I am-familiar-with
23:00 < zipcpi> xu do se-cmene lo-drata poi mi se-slabu
23:06 < isd> ah, yeah I got the literal but interpreted it more as a "your name doesn't look familiar, are you new here", not "it is a different name"
23:07 < isd> presumably lots of people you've not met are named things you are not familiar with
23:07 < isd> A loong time ago I had the nick "wobsite", but that was years ago. I've been idling in here a lot, not speaking up as much as I'd like (often busy with other things)
23:08 < isd> but I haven't gone by anything else for a while.
23:08 < zipcpi> lol Well yes, I did mean it like a "do I know you?" / "are you new here?" sense, but mainly because I'm often blindsided by Lojbanists changing names (seems to be a common IRC problem :p)
23:08 < zipcpi> OK, cool.
23:08 < zipcpi> je'e
23:10 < cliva> xu da cusku zo .optiio
23:10 < cliva> spagetufa: -lerfu .abu za'u re'u cusku
23:10 < spagetufa> (CU [{<(¹[{a bu} za'u] BOI¹) re'u> cùsku} VAU])
23:10 < cliva> spagetufa: +lerfu .abu za'u re'u cusku
23:10 < spagetufa> ([FA {<a bu> BOI}] [CU {<(¹[za'u BOI] re'u¹) cùsku> VAU}])
23:10 < zipcpi> u'i
23:11 < zipcpi> doi cliva ko sampla fi la tcekitauspo kelci'e go bo'oiru'e :p
23:11 < gleki> mi pu troci tua lu mi mo babocu mo li'u i ku'i mi fliba
23:12 < zipcpi> implemente le kelci'e
23:12 < cliva> za'a mi za'o na kibdu'a lo jai cabna .i .ai ca go'i
23:13 < zipcpi> uidai'i u'idai'i
23:15 < cliva> mo'u kibdu si kibdu'a
23:16 < zipcpi> da'i a website with a parser, with buttons: "Switch two random cmavo" "Switch two random cmavo (without telling me which)"
23:16 < cliva> .u'i
23:16 < zipcpi> CKTJ, the game you can play at home :p
23:17 < cliva> .i da'i sa'u lo ba'e ro cmavo cu se snigau lo cunso
23:17 < zipcpi> u'i
23:19 < cliva> gleki: si'au di'e jai banzu tu'a la jbabocu
23:19 < cliva>  abs_tag_term = start:(
23:19 < cliva>  -  (!gek tag:tag free:free* !selbri !gek_sentence sumti:(
23:19 < cliva>  +  (!gek tag:tag free:free* !BO_clause !selbri !gek_sentence sumti:(
23:19 < cliva> [...]
23:20 < zipcpi> la jbabocu ku ki'a
23:21 < cliva> spagetufa: ti broda ba bo cu mo
23:21 < spagetufa> ([FA ti] [{CU <bròda VAU>} JU'E ba bo {cu <mo VAU>} VAU])
23:21 < zipcpi> ju'e?
23:21 < zipcpi> Oh
23:22 < gleki> je'e la cliva
23:22 < gleki> i ki'e
23:23 < cliva> .ei mi di'a favgau lo gloso co'e ku mu'a
23:23 < cliva> .i la'azni
23:23 < gleki> ue la selpa'i cu finti lo notci poi la altatufa cu pagbu
23:37 < cliva> ze'irsaivi pu je ca je ba ku du'e roi
23:40 < zipcpi> Awr {la'ai} is taken; I wanted it to be to {la'a} what {ba'ai} is to {ba'a}
23:40 < zipcpi> I'm not too fond of {la'ai} though. {la'ai bu-anything} breaks
23:40 < cliva> pu ja'a se pilno tai ku
23:40 < cliva> ti'e
23:41 < zipcpi> ma .i zo la'ai xu
23:41 < cliva> go'i
23:41 < cliva> .i lo cmavo poi se smuni za'u da cu memyze'a soi sutra
23:41 < zipcpi> u'i
23:42 < zipcpi> People actually use {ba'ai}? I thought it was a kurtysmima'o :p
23:43 < cliva> zo ba'ai ja'a cnino mi
23:43 < cliva> yyy
23:43 < cliva> .i na go'oi pilno .i pu cmavo ba'e ma'oi ca'a
23:43 < cliva> je nai ma'oi mai
23:43 < zipcpi> ua
23:44 < zipcpi> By the way I found a possible answer to the {ju'oi} problem. {cau'i}
23:44 < zipcpi> Along with friends {cau'a} and {cau'e}
23:44 < zipcpi> {cau'i} = CAI, {cau'a} = NA, {cau'e} = NAhE
23:45 < cliva> cau'a ku mi nelci
23:45 < zipcpi> u'i
23:46 < zipcpi> Well it's different from {ju'ocu'i}, but would probably mean we'd have to use {ju'ocu'i} less
23:46 < zipcpi> often
23:48 < cliva> su'o se bangu zo'u lu ju'o nai li'u co'a basti lu ju'o cu'i li'u .i tormau do'a nai
23:48 < cliva> (to lo laldo smuni zo'u pilno lu ju'o na li'u ja lo simsa toi)
23:48 < zipcpi> xy'y cinri
23:49 < cliva> si'au zo la poi cmene cu se nelci so'i da
23:49 < zipcpi> la ze'oi la
23:49 < cliva> .i se ju la ckiui'irci cu .ei kajde lo troci be lo ka pilno lo cmene poi se pabgu lo kutybu'i
23:50 < cliva> s/pabgu/pagbu
23:50 < fenki> cliva meant to say: .i se ju la ckiui'irci cu .ei kajde lo troci be lo ka pilno lo cmene poi se pagbu lo kutybu'i
23:53 < zipcpi> I'm pretty bad with inventing cmavo. I treat new words like certain politicians treat certain pieces of legislation *cough*... we have to enter it into JVS to figure out what it means and how it should be used :p
23:54 < cliva> je'u so'o cmavo cu se pilno to'e ki'u nai lo nu ri no roi se jbovlaste
23:54 < zipcpi> And whether it's used often enough to deserve existing at all
23:59 < zipcpi> I'm not too fond of {la'ai}... requires {le'u}... breaks with anything that begins with {bu} or {si}...
23:59 < zipcpi> Wait
23:59 < zipcpi> exp: lo'u si le'u
23:59 < mensi> ([lo'u si le'u] VAU)
23:59 < zipcpi> exp: lo'u bu le'u
23:59 < mensi> ([lo'u bu le'u] VAU)
23:59 < zipcpi> makfa
23:59 < zipcpi> off: lo'u bu le'u
23:59 < mensi> ([lo'u bu le'u] VAU)
--- Day changed Thu Jul 16 2015
00:00 < zipcpi> But yeah the le'u is quite a turn-off to me. I'd prefer things like la'oi .ali.
00:01 < zipcpi> It might be desirable to have an indicator of some sort though that says "Pronounce this in the Lojbanic manner", and possibly "This is IPA", but they can probably be typographical rather than real cmavo
00:05 < gleki> altatufa isnt necessarily frowing. i just shrinked terjonma'o section
00:06 < gleki> removing eks, jeks
00:06 < gleki> merging them all into joik_jek
00:06 < gleki> zi'e was also deleted from everywhere except joik_jek line itself
00:07 < gleki> kernelo_lo_terjoma = expr:(JA_clause / JOI_clause / stag BO_clause / A_clause / ZIhE_clause)
00:08 < gleki> this unification ofc. leads to some weird results
00:08 < zipcpi> Re: Lojban use: Of course Lojban is mainly used to talk about Lojban. I mean, when we talk in English, what do we code-switch tho Lojban for? Metalinguistic words like cmavo, bridi etc.
00:08 < gleki> alta: mi e e do
00:08 < mensi> (I [FA {mi <e e do>}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
00:08 < gleki> no idea what that could mean
00:08 < zipcpi> If we count all that, {cmavo} is probably the most common word :p
00:08 < zipcpi> u'i
00:09 < gleki> but the whole {e / ebo / ebabo} looks weird
00:09 < zipcpi> alta: a e i o u a e i o u i o a e u i o a e u a i e o u a i e o u e o i a u e o i a u
00:09 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "u" found.
00:09 < zipcpi> alta: u u u u u
00:09 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "u" found.
00:10 < gleki> U conlang is always supported
00:10 < zipcpi> u'i
00:10 < zipcpi> alta: u
00:10 < mensi> (I [u {FA ZOhE} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
00:10 < zipcpi> It probably has the right meaning too :p
00:12 < gleki> tersmus: iju fa zo'e cu co'e
00:12 < tersmus> co'e(c0)
00:23 < zipcpi> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban/B1zZGXJ6ows More illocutionary force
00:26 < zipcpi> Huh if Guskant-gi works out we might not even need ga and gu technically
00:27 < zipcpi> All replaced by JAgi / giJA
00:27 < gleki> new ga and gu or old ones?
00:27 < zipcpi> Selpa'i-ga/gu
00:28 < gleki> they were created because he didnt like xorxe's mad proposals
00:28 < zipcpi> Guskant-gi is mad proposal?
00:28 < zipcpi> I don't know the mad proposals
00:28 < gleki> selpa'i's system is a rework of the original proposal by xorxes back from 1996.
00:29 < zipcpi> gije broda gi brode
00:29 < zipcpi> Is that mad-proposal?
00:29 < gleki> no, jegi broda gi brode
00:29 < zipcpi> Huh... zantufa supports both
00:29 < zipcpi> zantufa: gije broda gi brode
00:29 < zantufa> (CU [{gi je} broda {gi brode} GIhI] VAU)
00:29 < zipcpi> zantufa: jegi broda gi brode
00:29 < zantufa> (CU [{je gi} broda {gi brode} GIhI] VAU)
00:29 < gleki> yes, ilmentufa originally supported all three systems
00:29 < gleki> exp: jegi mo gi mo
00:29 < mensi> (CU [je gi] [CU {mo VAU}] gi [CU {mo VAU}] VAU)
00:30 < gleki> exp: mi mo vau je mo
00:30 < mensi> (mi [CU {mo vau}] [je {CU <mo VAU>} VAU])
00:30 < gleki> exp: mo gi'e mo
00:30 < mensi> ([CU {mo VAU}] [gi'e {CU <mo VAU>} VAU])
00:30 < gleki> exp: ga mo gi mo
00:30 < mensi> (CU [ga {CU <mo VAU>} gi {CU <mo VAU>} VAU])
00:30 < gleki> then they added selpa'is system too
00:30 < zipcpi> Except that selpa'i-gu doesn't work
00:30 < zipcpi> exp: mi guje broda gi brode
00:30 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
00:30 < gleki> no idea
00:31 < gleki> i only used JA=A in CC. i ignore the other proposals
00:31 < gleki> because they are changing all the time
00:32 < gleki> btw, today i finally merged NA into tags
00:32 < gleki> except when it has the second meaning when working with connectives
00:33 < zipcpi> Part of the problem with connectives though is the question connectives
00:33 < zipcpi> I don't remember them x.x
00:33 < gleki> they are based on -i
00:34 < gleki> {gi'i} is perfect
00:34 < zipcpi> But the rest... x.x
00:34 < gleki> as i said i used both A and JA and A=JA
00:34 < gleki> in CC
00:34 < gleki> so je'i, ji, je'i=ji
00:34 < zipcpi> Yeah but there's still GA
00:34 < gleki> you mean ge'i
00:35 < zipcpi> Yep...
00:35 < gleki> lai'a is just {sei PAcu'o}?
00:35 < zipcpi> .y.
00:35 < zipcpi> nm then
00:36 < zipcpi> It's death was heralded when I couldn't make it fit {ba'ai} anyway T.T
00:36 < gleki> we need a name for this 4-set problem
00:36 < zipcpi> What set problem? The connectives?
00:37 < gleki> k:zgazganzganaga'aza'a
00:37 < mensi> (CU [Z:zgazganzganaga'aza'a VAU])
00:37 < gleki> yes, let that be the name for it
00:37 < gleki> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/lojban/6H7JgQOJTzk/R_ZSGGomhp8J
00:38 < zipcpi> Oh
00:38 < gleki> so this lai'a is proliferating of this problem
00:38 < gleki> loglan uses {soi crano} = {sei mi cmila} all the time
00:39 < zipcpi> Nevermind, I downvoted it
00:42 < zipcpi> Sigh... sei
00:47 < zipcpi> exp: broda vau nai
00:47 < mensi> (CU [broda {vau nai}])
00:47 < zipcpi> off: broda vau nai
00:47 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] or [uU] but "i" found.
00:47 < zipcpi> u'i
00:48 < zipcpi> off: broda vaucai
00:48 < mensi> (broda [vau cai])
01:12 < zipcpi> exp xoi pa cu'o ko'a broda
01:13 < zipcpi> exp: xoi pa cu'o ko'a broda
01:13 < mensi> ([xoi {CU <(¹pa BOI¹) cu'o> <ko'a VAU>} SEhU] [CU {broda VAU}])
01:13 < zipcpi> xoi pa cu'o vau ko'a broda
01:13 < zipcpi> exp: xoi pa cu'o vau ko'a broda
01:13 < mensi> ([{xoi <CU (¹[pa BOI] cu'o¹) vau> SEhU} ko'a] [CU {broda VAU}])
01:15 < zipcpi> exp: lo'u blablablacomcomco'e fa'o le'u
01:15 < mensi> ([lo'u {blablablacomcomco'e fa'o} le'u] VAU)
01:15 < zipcpi> exp: lo'u su su su su susasisosu le'u
01:15 < mensi> ([lo'u {su su su su su sa si so su} le'u] VAU)
01:16 < zipcpi> gleki: I think that's the official way to quote people who say problematic magic-words :p
01:16 < zipcpi> Not sure how to quote something with {le'u} though lol
01:18 < zipcpi> Huh
01:18 < zipcpi> http://lojban.github.io/cll/19/9/
01:19 < zipcpi> 9.5
01:19 < zipcpi> THat's funny, because I thought ri refered to {lo'u le ninmu cu morsi le'u}
01:19 < zipcpi> oi
01:20 < zipcpi> exp: lo'u zo le'u le'u
01:20 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "e" found.
01:20 < zipcpi> What the heck
01:20 < zipcpi> off: lo'u zo le'u le'u
01:20 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "e" found.
01:20 < zipcpi> "However, it is possible for a “le'u” to occur within a “lo'u ... le'u” quotation by preceding it with the cmavo “zo”, discussed in Section 10"
01:20 < zipcpi> What is this nonsense
01:22 < zipcpi> ca'e {le'e'u} stands for {le'u} within a lo'u le'u quote, {le'e'e'u} stands for {le'e'u}, so on ad infinitum zo'o
01:24 < zipcpi> cylyly zbusufukai
01:24 < zipcpi> lo jbobau cu zbusufukai
01:24 < zipcpi> ro da zbusufukai
01:24 < zipcpi> ro da ka'e daspo lo jbobau
01:33 < zipcpi> blanu: x1 is blue? Not x1 is blue in aspect x2 to observer x3? :p
01:35 < zipcpi> lol this is the kind of thing that is why I dislike E-prime. Sure maybe English "is" is often used to imply absolutism where it isn't desirable... but I don't believe in getting rid of it altogether
01:36 < zipcpi> It just tweaks with my philosophical sensibilities
01:36 < zipcpi> Theres just no way to say A = A in E-prime
01:40 < ctefa`o> xoi rodo
01:43 < gleki> heh, someone bought lojban.ru domain http://lojban.ru/
01:43 < gleki> at least it's a lojbanist
01:43 < zipcpi> lol I half-expected "Girls of Lojbanistan" o.o
01:44 < gleki> once it existed. i think we should have bought it
01:44 < zipcpi> What existed
01:45 < zipcpi> A porn site using the name "Lojban"?
01:47 < gleki> no, lojban.ru existed
01:51 < zipcpi> Heh
01:57 < zipcpi> coi selpa'i
01:58 < selpahi> zo'o xu do prami mi
01:58 < zipcpi> ja'a pedypa'i u'i
01:58 < selpahi> .i va'o tu'a na ku zo la jai mapti
01:58 < gleki> xrotu prami
01:59 < zipcpi> zo xropa'i
02:00 < zipcpi> zo xedypa'i zo pedypa'i zo tubypa'i zo lazypa'i zo cinpa'i zo ci'irpa'i
02:01 < zipcpi> mi finti du'e lujvo pe zo prami
02:02 < selpahi> na'i go'i
02:02 < zipcpi> ie du'e na'i
02:02 < zipcpi> dukse fi no da poi vajni
02:05 < zipcpi> "The rightwards scope of {na} is standard Lojban by now. It can hardly be called a proposal anymore." ua i'e
02:07 < gleki> je'e je'e
02:07 < gleki> i ku'i CLL cu xusra lo drata
02:08 < zipcpi> je'e
02:08 < zipcpi> ku'i mi mutce to'e nelci zoi zoi All that glitters is not gold zoi
02:09 < selpahi> Not all that glitters is gold
02:09 < zipcpi> Yeah
02:09 < selpahi> You were asking about {jo'a} the other day. I use it like "[sic]" is used in English.
02:09 < zipcpi> lol
02:09 < gleki> uanai
02:10 < zipcpi> {je'au}?
02:10 < zipcpi> {je'aunai} rather?
02:10 < zipcpi> ... dunno
02:11 < selpahi> "This is meant as written, this is not a typo"
02:11 < zipcpi> Yeah I know what you mean, but I'm not sure that is correct against {na'i}
02:11 < selpahi> It tells the listener that the potentially unusual word or phrase is intentional
02:11 < gleki> lu le'ainai li'u
02:12 < zipcpi> Oh yeah that
02:12 < gleki> i ku'i mi jimpe
02:12 < gleki> i simsa zo'oi sic i ku'i na mulno dunli
02:12 < selpahi> ie
02:12 < gleki> i la'a zo'oi sic ambigu
02:12 < selpahi> pe'i smuvrici
02:13 < zipcpi> I use {je'au} mainly as a sort of informal {sa} / {sa'ai}
02:13 < gleki> en: je'au
02:13 < mensi> je'au = [UI3] discursive: correcting/corrective/correction - inattentive/uncaring/neutral toward the presence of
02:13 < mensi> possible errors - permitting (known/likely/plausible) error/incompleteness/approximation |>>>
02:14 < mensi> krtisfranks
02:14 < zipcpi> But I have no idea what {je'aucu'i} or {je'aunai} mean
02:14 < gleki> sounds like sa'e scale
02:14 < zipcpi> Don't think so... je'au is clearly meant to correct something, pe'i
02:15 < zipcpi> Oh... you mean the scale is *like* sa'e
02:15 < selpahi> Ithkuil has a "corrective" bias, sounds like {je'au}
02:16 < gleki> what is "correcting" if not specifying something more precisely
02:16 < gleki> selpahi: ma nuzba la mupli
02:16 < zipcpi> nebyplovoicpi for heron? Really?
02:17 < selpahi> no da nuzba .i mulgau ba tu'a lo .itku'ile vlaste .i ku'i ji'a mi nitcu lo ka se jibri
02:17 < selpahi> .i lakne ku'i fa lo nu la mupli cu mulno ba za lo jeftu be li su'e ci
02:17 < gleki> ua
02:18 < gleki> B120 #ERROR
02:19 < gleki> i e'u do jmina valsi bu
02:19 < gleki> xm
02:19 < gleki> i e'u do jmina me'o valsi bu
02:19 < selpahi> ua nai
02:19 < gleki> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UFwAZz-PpCZ6t5jU0wCd5TR2LgskBNInlEpKiktYCoQ/edit#gid=0
02:19 < selpahi> ithkuil: falara'x
02:19 < ithkuil> falara’x: P1S1/STA-f-OBL-UNI/CSL/M/DEL/NRM-NA1_1/5-EXS-CRR-IFL/UNFRAMED
02:19 < selpahi> "I meant it's not there"
02:20 < selpahi> je'au na zvati
02:20 < selpahi> me'o valsi bu mo
02:21 < gleki> du me'o kunti bu
02:21 < selpahi> ua mi ca viska
02:21 < selpahi> .i ie cikre
02:23 < gleki> i barda se gunka
02:31 < zipcpi> Hm ... {nakusai} still suffers from the problem of open bridi-tails; if there are any sub-bridi left open, it will only negate one sub-bridi, not the entire sentence
02:32 < zipcpi> I have no more control over {i'au}/{iau} at this point lol
02:32 < zipcpi> It keeps showing up everywhere
02:35 < zipcpi> doi la selpa'i: .i xu do ja lo datpre poi do djuno tauki ka'e ciska lo kibypapri pe la jbouitki je poi ve ciksi tau le cnino vlaturge'a
02:37 < zipcpi> da'i ai mi ciska .iku'i mi na mutce lo ka se slabu le krinu be tau le vlaturge'a
02:37 < selpahi> la cirko ba'o ciska
02:37 < gleki> it's not a sub bridi, it's a bridi joined with another one via a common head
02:37 < zipcpi> ki'oi ma a'u
02:37 < selpahi> lo mriste
02:39 < selpahi> .i ji'a http://mw.lojban.org/papri/informal_description_of_the_PEG_morphology_algorithm laldo
02:40 < zipcpi> What I want is something that says... here's what changed, here's why we think it had to change, etc.
02:41 < zipcpi> Cause I still have some tadni coming to me asking why it changed, and my answer keeps changing each time because they're only guesses
02:41 < durka42> coi
02:41 < zipcpi> coi
02:43 < zipcpi> I took to the new morpohology like a fish to water... the changed happened during my hiatus, but I had trouble figuring out some parts of the old one... like why things like {zdurio} are considered zi'evla rather than lujvo...
02:43 < selpahi> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/lojban-beginners/f-u86pPQ-TQ/BVFmXWTSgSQJ
02:43 < zipcpi> Not to mention the whole issue with assimilation
02:43 < gleki> because rio is not a rafsi
02:45 < zipcpi> lol cirko also called himself {la me zo'e}?
02:45 < ctefa`o> rio would make a nice cmavo though
02:45 < ctefa`o> If you like
02:45 < ctefa`o> Want 100+ new simple cmavo forms
02:45 < ctefa`o> Probably not
02:45 < selpahi> I want fewer cmavo, not more.
02:46 < gleki> rio is already a cmavo in La Alta
02:46 < selpahi> The 10000+ experimental cmavo don't help us at all.
02:46 < ctefa`o> .i'e
02:46 < zipcpi> u'i mi mabla
02:47 < selpahi> I often get asked why there are so few people who speak this language.
02:47 < ctefa`o> TOO NERDY SI SI
02:49 < gleki> for mekso new selmaho might be justifiable. although curtis should think of brivla first
02:50 < zipcpi> selpahi: Hm I like what you sent me but I want the justification for dumping a whole bunch of zi'evla and cmene to the "obsolete" list
02:51 < selpahi> ?
02:51 < zipcpi> It's like, I can see the justification, but I can only guess at what it is
02:51 < selpahi> uanai
02:51 < durka42> you can look at the bpfk list to see the discussion of CGV clusters
02:51 < selpahi> Oh
02:51 < selpahi> The morphology
02:51 < zipcpi> Basically, why is CGV banned
02:51 < durka42> too hard to pronounce, too easy to confuse for CVGV, is the summary
02:52 < durka42> ironically curtis sparked that thread, by defining {jie'e'e} :p
02:52 < durka42> I mean *{jie'e'e}
02:52 < zipcpi> u'i
02:52 < zipcpi> What for I wonder
02:52 < zipcpi> mekso operator: assoviated Legendre polynomial in a with unassociated order b and associated order c
02:52 < durka42> Legendre polynomials, naturally
02:52 < selpahi> http://tiki.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+Ban+on+consonant-glide-vowel+strings
02:52 < durka42> ua
02:53 < zipcpi> And thus Lojban is destroyed. RIP zo'o
02:54 < durka42> nunkurtspo
02:55 < gleki> 19 more questions with a score of 10 or more
02:55 < gleki> http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/83133/jbobau-joi-jboceu-lojban-language-and-culture
03:01 < zipcpi> Hm that vote is... interesting
03:01 < zipcpi> Basically 5 people want CgV in cmevla, 5 people don't want it
03:02 < zipcpi> Didn't count the ones that wanted the more complicated rules
03:02 < durka42> there were too many options
03:02 < durka42> most of the options were a middle ground that would have made the morphology more complex, not less
03:02 < durka42> so we went for the hard line
03:02 < zipcpi> Well, first-past-the-post problem
03:02 < durka42> (though I think I voted for one of the messy ones)
03:03 < zipcpi> u'i
03:03 < durka42> was it first past the post?
03:03 < zipcpi> Well actually they're all the same rule
03:03 < zipcpi> We can just ca'e call it "bad glide combinations"
03:03 < zipcpi> [sibilant or dental C+iV] and [liquid C+uV]
03:03 < durka42> oh yeah I remember someone saying we should discuss voting methods and then guskant said "fuck it here is a google form, we're doing it live"
03:04 < zipcpi> Well, the "winner" is "disallow CgV in cmevla/fu'ivla/ma'ovla", and it has the most votes, but only 45.5%
03:04 < durka42> yeah
03:04 < durka42> plurality!
03:05 < zipcpi> Mhm
03:05 < gleki> su'oi zei zanru
03:05 < durka42> heh, cmavla => cmavo => ma'ovla
03:05 < gleki> vau zo'o
03:06 < zipcpi> Why even have {ma'ovla}
03:06 < zipcpi> Just for poetic assonance I guess?
03:06 < durka42> yeah
03:06 < gleki> en: ma'ovla
03:06 < mensi> [< cmavo valsi ≈ Structure word word] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
03:06 < mensi> ma'ovla[6367], cmavyvla[7988], ma'orvalsi[9526], cmavyvalsi[10047]
03:06 < zipcpi> na se jbovlaste
03:06 < durka42> I never saw it before that thread, ju'ocu'i
03:06 < durka42> smudu'i zo cmavo
03:07 < zipcpi> logji bangu -> lojban -> lojbo, lojbo bangu -> jbobau
03:07 < zipcpi> cadzu cipni -> dzipo, dzipo cipni -> zipcpi
03:08 < zipcpi> refkusi vlakra
03:08 < gleki> -> jbobo
03:08 < zipcpi> je'u
03:09 < zipcpi> I kinda want rafsi -job- for jbobo, so that if we ever need a zi'evlajvo for jbobo + zi'evla, we have an alternative to -lob-
03:10 < zipcpi> But I dunno lol
03:10 < zipcpi> Probably the ones that invented jbobo would support this idea
03:10 < durka42> waste of space since jbobo is (intentionally) a duplicate
03:10 < zipcpi> :p
03:11 < zipcpi> Problem is that zi'evlajvo does break the doctrine that CCV cmavo is "better" than CVC cmavo
03:11 < zipcpi> Er, rafsi, not cmavo
03:11 < zipcpi> oi
03:19 < selpahi> zi'e vlajvo
03:19 < zipcpi> Ugh
03:19 < zipcpi> zevlyjvo
03:19 < zipcpi> {zevlo}
03:20 < zipcpi> Thus completing the set. {gismu}, {cmavo}, {lujvo}, {zevlo}, {brivo}, {cmevo}
03:21 < zipcpi> Well maybe {zevla}, since it doesn't use the -vo ending
03:21 < zipcpi> vlaste: zevla (gimka)
03:21 < vlaste> zo zevla gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo zevla gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
03:23 < zipcpi> vlaste: zivla (gimka)
03:23 < vlaste> zo zivla gimkamsmikezypro zo zivle noi catni gismu .i zo zivla gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
03:23 < zipcpi> Oh right
03:24 < zipcpi> jvozba makes {zifyvlajvo}, but, come on
03:24 < gleki> selpahi: lu na mi e do li'u je'e i ku'i lo gi'e zei jufra cu mo i mu'a lu mi mo na gi'e ja'ai mo li'u mo
03:25 < selpahi> mi na mo gi'e ja'a mo
03:26 < zipcpi> do cau'a mo
03:30 < gleki> exp: ba mi e do mo
03:30 < mensi> ([ba {mi <e do>}] [CU {mo VAU}])
03:31 < gleki> alta: na mi e do mo
03:31 < mensi> (I [{na ZOhE} {FA <mi (¹e do¹)>}] [CU {mo VAU}])
03:31 < gleki> ju'inai
03:32 < zipcpi> Yeah jvova'i is a problem sometimes
03:34 < zipcpi> Where a lujvo is used to build as a root to build another lujvo, but oops, tosmabru, so you need to change it. Well the least damage you can do is make it something like {zi'ervlajvo}
03:34 < zipcpi> But nope, jvova'i says that {zifyvlajvo} is "better"
03:34 < gleki> 
03:35 < zipcpi> And I don't think we want to make new gismu everytime that problem is encountered lol
03:38 < gleki> alta: na mi e do mo
03:38 < mensi> (I [{na <mi (¹e do¹)>} {FA ZOhE}] [CU {mo VAU}])
03:38 < gleki> selpahi: xu do tugni
03:39 < gleki> zipcpi: just dont use CV'V rafsi in prefixes
03:39 < zipcpi> So ban {zi'evla}, use only {zifyvla}. I might agree with that but jbovlaste keeps giving me that ominous warning
03:40 < zipcpi> Though I'm not sure if that threat is ever followed up on
03:40 < selpahi> If mr and ml weren't initials, then CCV *and* CV[nmrl] would be safe.
03:40 < gleki> alta: mi pe na e do cu mo
03:40 < mensi> (I [FA {mi <pe (¹[DOhE ZOhE] [na e] [DOhE do]¹) GEhU>}] [cu {mo VAU}])
03:41 < gleki> nu'o jdice lo du'u xamgu xukau
03:44 < zipcpi> Wuzzy is like the stern librarian of JVS. "Hey the jvova'i isn't optimal." "Hey the morphology is new and weird". " Hey you didn't follow the Dewey Decimal System"
03:44 < zipcpi> :p
03:56 < gleki> lo nu traduki la'e la alis cu jai ri'a tatpi
03:57 < zipcpi> dai
03:59 < zipcpi> {pixydja}? Hey I found a {no'e zi'ejvo} :p
03:59 < zipcpi> -dja is really {cidja}, but {djacu} is a more natural metaphor; however it just happens to fit!
04:12 < zipcpi> k: zi'evlrjvo
04:12 < mensi> (CU [Z:zi'evlrjvo VAU])
04:12 < zipcpi> Well there's always that, but *shudders at the syllabic consonant*
04:14 < zipcpi> *zi'evlyjvo probably doesn't break anything; but all these unassigned-morphology-proposals might not be compatible with each other
04:14 < zipcpi> Even if they might be compatible with current morphology
04:16 < zipcpi> And, funnily, we might want {lujvla} so that we can talk about compound words in general, like in other languages, or in zi'evla formed from Lojban roots :p
04:17 < zipcpi> And {vlrjv}! Wow
04:18 < zipcpi> So many consonants
04:20 < zipcpi> k: zvaisku
04:20 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "z" found.
04:21 < zipcpi> slinku'i
04:21 < zipcpi> k: zvaiku
04:21 < mensi> (CU [Z:zvaiku VAU])
04:26 < selpahi> Gah Wuzzy
04:27 < zipcpi> What?
04:27 < zipcpi> What did he do? (Well I know he does many things, but what did he do specifically :p)
04:27 < selpahi> Just all those comments
04:27 < zipcpi> Oh...
04:28 < zipcpi> Yep... told you about the jvova'i librarian thing
04:28 < selpahi> Also he downvotes my words as if that would somehow stop people from using them
04:29 < selpahi> He seems unaware of recent developments (i.e. post-CLL zo'o)
04:29 < zipcpi> :p
04:30 < selpahi> At least he has now defined a pajvo ahaha
04:30 < selpahi> .u'i
04:30 < zipcpi> pajvo?
04:30 < selpahi> zi'ejvo
04:30 < selpahi> selpamnonjvo
04:30 < zipcpi> {zevla} is me
04:31 < selpahi> No, he defined pixdja as drinking water
04:31 < selpahi> pixydja*
04:31 < zipcpi> Oh, {pixydja}
04:31 < zipcpi> It's a no'e zi'ejvo lol
04:31 < zipcpi> Because {cidja} actually makes sense, in a way :p
04:32 < zipcpi> In fact I think that's what Wuzzy thought was your intention all along
04:32 < zipcpi> He put in the etymology
04:32 < zipcpi> Implicit-abstraction lujvo from “nu pinxe kei cidja”.
04:32 < selpahi> Yes
04:32 < selpahi> I don't know.
04:33 < selpahi> I don't care. It's just annoying.
04:33  * zipcpi nods
04:34 < zipcpi> I had to scold him for downvoting all the translations of {ybu}
04:38 < zipcpi> Anyway congratulations on tricking Wuzzy to adopt a zi'ejvo lol
04:38 < selpahi> lol
04:39 < durka42> maybe we should change their vote weight to 0.5 zo'o
04:41 < zipcpi> u'i
04:41 < zipcpi> Hey how to say "adopt" as in "adopt a child"? {runrirbi'o}?
04:42 < selpahi> rirni isn't biological
04:42 < zipcpi> Might be stretching {rutni} though lol
04:42 < durka42> just rirbi'o I guess
04:42 < zipcpi> I know but a mere {rirbi'o} might not be clear
04:42 < selpahi> bi'o is too weak
04:42 < selpahi> says nothing about intention
04:42 < zipcpi> ie
04:42 < durka42> well there's no other way to become a parent of a child who is older than 0, .u'i
04:44 < selpahi> Add it to the nabmyrta'imacusku if you don't find a solution now
04:44 < zipcpi> Well we might just want a word for "adopt"; perhaps several words for different senses
04:44 < durka42> there are already several words for "adopt" in the sense of "choose"
04:44 < durka42> zo plicu'a
04:45 < zipcpi> Ah... well, we need one for "adopting a child/pet"
04:45 < durka42> rirni is a bit weird for pets
04:45 < zipcpi> lazycu'a or something?
04:45 < zipcpi> I know
04:45 < durka42> that would just be kujbi'o
04:45 < durka42> mi plicu'a lo ka lazni vau .u'i
04:46 < zipcpi> https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHFX_enMY573MY574&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=define%20adopt
04:46 < zipcpi> Defines base sense as "legally take another's child and bring it up as one's own"
04:46 < zipcpi> And defines the rest, like "adopt an idea", as metaphorical senses growing out of it
04:48 < zipcpi> What is "nabmyrta'imacusku"?
04:48 < zipcpi> Is it a mailing list just for undefined concepts?
04:52 < selpahi> It's this https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LH_bawafDZBp5h4shGoajnTU7sttOilfpyxqUD4B5BM/edit#gid=0
04:52 < selpahi> Just a list of things we don't know how to say
04:52 < selpahi> can be phrases or words
04:53 < zipcpi> towel?
04:53 < zipcpi> Hm French fries... what is that called in other languages
04:53 < selpahi> pommes frites
04:53 < zipcpi> salami sounds like a zi'evla
04:54 < zipcpi> sarcasm... just make {xo'onku} or something lol
04:55 < zipcpi> generous: zo do'a zo'o
04:56 < zipcpi> "interact with (not the social sense)" Hm my new gismu {jonse} might be related
05:00 < gleki> {co'a rirni} is fine, imo. it doesnt necessarily needs to be "parent"
05:00 < zipcpi> exp: pa bi'i ci moi
05:00 < mensi> (CU [{<pa BOI> <bi'i (¹ci BOI¹)>} moi] VAU)
05:01 < zipcpi> gleki: Fine if you don't need to distinguish between an adoption and the biological sense
05:02 < gleki> zipcpi: for biological sense we have another gismu
05:03 < zipcpi> Do we then, need to say rirni jenai ???
05:06 < zipcpi> {traide}
05:06 < gleki> co'a is enough imo
05:07 < zipcpi> Context is great and lets us get by with a reduced vocabulary, but sometimes there needs to be a way to distinguish these concepts that we are ramming together
05:08 < zipcpi> The ramming together isn't necessarily a bad thing, cause when we say "parent", it might not be desirable to specifically have to say "adopted parent"
05:08 < zipcpi> But sometimes we need that distinguishment
05:08 < gleki> {mi co'a jai zu'e rirni lo mlatu} {i ue i xu do ji'a mlatu} {i na go'i i mi arxokuna}
05:08 < zipcpi> u'i
05:08 < selpahi> lol
05:09 < zipcpi> mi gerku
05:09 < zipcpi> jenai zipcpi
05:09 < gleki> {rirni} means more "to rear"
05:09 < durka42> you could use flarirni/jberirni
05:10 < zipcpi> Adding that as "danfu" #2
05:10 < gleki> toki pona style is inevitable in every language
05:11 < zipcpi> I don't know what you mean by "toki pona style"?
05:11 < durka42> tanru staile
05:11 < zipcpi> Ah
05:11 < durka42> dotco lujvo staile
05:11 < durka42> zo'o ru'e
05:11 < gleki> not only that
05:11 < gleki> just low precision
05:12 < durka42> well TP has low precision
05:12 < selpahi> Yet other languages have more specific words.
05:12 < durka42> lojban has selectable precision :p
05:12 < gleki> TP is 100 less precise than lojban so what. here is the 100th case when we get this lack of precision. natlangs do then same all the time. we just dont notice that
05:13 < gleki> <quote> to have words for such combinations of properties as
05:13 < gleki> the sun and the water on a swimmer's chest, the vague tremulous rose color we see with our eyes closed, the sensation of being carried along by a river and also by sleep.
05:13 < gleki> </quote>
05:18 < zipcpi> exp: zo kanpylerci (to noi xa'o se jbovlaste toi)
05:18 < mensi> ([{zo kanpylerci} {to <noi (¹CU [xa'o {se jbovlaste}] VAU¹) KUhO> toi}] VAU)
05:23 < gleki> i suggested rafybri so long ago and people are still stuck in anarchic lujvo system
05:23 < zipcpi> I dunno what that is
05:27 < gleki> "merge free and indicators" <-- that's an important task
05:28 < gleki> hm, i can't do that. i need to separate UI, CAI/NAI first
05:28 < gleki> zipcpi: was that split formalized by you?
05:28 < zipcpi> I did write something about it
05:29 < gleki> because some work as independent words, some as modifiers of the first and some attach to the end like e.g. {ro'a}
05:30 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/jbocre:_Attitudinals_-_time_for_a_split%3F
05:30 < gleki> [ui {(ui-[nai-sai])}-ro'a]
05:31 < gleki> okay, so interjections, interjection modifiers, and .. what shall we call ROhA and friends?
05:31 < gleki> endings?
05:31 < zipcpi> categories
05:32 < zipcpi> Or spheres
05:32 < gleki> iim gonna write new rules for all that then
05:33 < zipcpi> Is the "cu li" dialect inspired by toki pona? :p
05:33 < gleki> yeah, and also by selpa'i who didnt like c- sound.
05:34 < zipcpi> Ahaha
05:34 < gleki> but generally it's inspired by this ugly tcekitau dialect
05:34 < gleki> as opposed to it
05:34 < noncomcinse> coi zo'e do'u
05:34 < gleki> feel fre to add it to BSFK proposals
05:34 < zipcpi> lol
05:37 < gleki> oh my, ROhA are all in UI. who could ve guessed
05:37 < zipcpi> Yes
05:38 < zipcpi> ei ro da me ma'oi ui iau zo'o
05:40 < Envigado> co'o
05:43 < zipcpi> OK... "default", yet another missing word
05:43 < zipcpi> There is {tecycuxskicauzmi} but... come on
05:43 < gleki> i usually used {zmiku} or {na'o} for it
05:43 < gleki> the first is more in GUIs
05:44 < zipcpi> Hm found zmiselcu'a
05:45 < gleki> not necessarily chosen
05:45 < gleki> it can be just {pamoi} value
05:48 < zipcpi> lol I found {li'o ce'ai} to use FA bu in {ka}
06:00 < gleki> so it all means that adding INT, MOD and END (endings) will have to be done manually
06:00 < selpahi> Ilmen uses cuxycau for default
06:00 < gleki> en: cuxycau
06:00 < gleki> jbo: cuxycau
06:02 < zipcpi> Seems like a cimjvo but I don't really care lol
06:02 < selpahi> xu mi na nelci lo cy zei sance ?!
06:03 < gleki> http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/parallel-universe-lojban
06:03 < selpahi> ua do tavla fi zo su noi basti
06:03 < selpahi> .i mi ra'u nai sai pante
06:04 < gleki> i babo mi finti la culis
06:05 < selpahi> mango jeli selckiku
06:05 < gleki> "free" is found 267 times in altatufa a'enaisai
06:06 < gleki> interesting what tool guskant is using to develop zantufa
06:07 < gleki> i use ircitufa that has a button to recompile .js files.
06:14 < zipcpi> My current understanding of the grammar of {i'au}/{iau} (and probably the final understanding, a'o) is that it isn't actually a famyma'o. All it does is two things: 1. add all famyma'o to return to the top level of the sentence. Basically, everything {.i} will add except the final {vau}. 2. any UI/NAI/CAI attitudinals that attach to it, scope over the entire sentence
06:14 < zipcpi> {mi broda do iau iau iau iau iau zo'o} would be grammatical under this understanding
06:15 < zipcpi> Because iau isn't a famyma'o itself, only adds them, and it works even when there isn't any famyma'o to add
06:17 < zipcpi> One can also probably sort of abuse it; using it to close NU/NOI construct and just continue on with the sentence, and get by most of the times without knowing about {vau}, {kei}, or {ku'o} at all... until the time they want to only close some clauses, and not all lol
06:30 < zipcpi> ... I just added {.i} (just to hyperlink it to {i}) to JVS, and it called it an "experimental cmavo" lol
06:47 < gleki> looks like i succeded in showing the structure of {ui uinaisairo'a} in altatufa
06:47 < zipcpi> alta: ui uinaisairo'a
06:47 < mensi> ([I {ui <ui (¹nai [sai ro'a]¹)>}] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
06:47 < gleki> no, not here yet
06:47 < zipcpi> Hmm... next do TOIhE lol
06:47 < selpahi> internal grammar of UI
06:48 < selpahi> I should finish my internal grammar of quantifiers
06:48 < zipcpi> Yeah {toi'e} is a kurtyma'o, but it's actually useful, otherwise there's no way to unambiguously scope attitudinals over each other
06:48 < gleki> if/when mensi returns i can show you
06:49 < zipcpi> {i'au} used to be in {toi'e}. That cmavo's been through a lot lol
06:49 < gleki> although i still dont know how to name variable in altatufa
06:49 < zipcpi> used to be in TOIhE
06:50 < gleki> alta: ui ui nai sai ru'e  ro'a
06:50 < mensi> ([I {ui <ui (¹nai [sai ru'e]¹)> ro'a}] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
06:50 < zipcpi> Hm, ro'a doesn't attach to the second ui?
06:51 < gleki> i still dont know how to treat TAG nai
06:51 < gleki> it does attach, it's prettifier that is not pretty
06:51 < gleki> INT = expr:(FUhE_clause? (((UI_clause / DAhO_clause) !BU_clause MOD?) (END MOD?)* / free)+ FUhO_clause?){return _node("interjection", expr); }
06:51 < gleki> END = expr:(ROhA_clause !BU_clause) {return _node("interjection ending", expr); }
06:51 < gleki> MOD = expr:((NAI_clause / CAI_clause) !BU_clause MOD*) {return _node("interjection modifier", expr); }
06:51 < zipcpi> alta: banai ko'a broda
06:51 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
06:59 < zipcpi> Selpahi: I upvoted {pinxydja} just to counter the Wuzzy's downvotes. I also defined {pixyjau} though, just because.
07:01 < gleki> it's because they were in post_clause, however, currently the idea is that NAI can't work on it's own
07:06 < gleki> so currently NAI can work as an interjection modifiers, in connectives, as vocative modifier (a somewhat separate case) and now for tense modals
07:07 < gleki> altA: banai mi mo
07:07 < gleki> alta: banai mi mo
07:07 < mensi> (I [{ba nai} mi] [CU {mo VAU}])
07:07 < gleki> alta: basai mi mo
07:07 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
07:07 < gleki> ^ intentionally
07:08 < gleki> similarly {i mlatu sai} makes no sense. maybe it should be autorestored to {mlatu ge'esai}
07:12 < zipcpi> {barda sai} has use though
07:12 < gleki> what does it mean
07:12 < zipcpi> Basically anything that has a scalar interpretation
07:12 < zipcpi> {sai'e barda}, or {mutce lo ka barda}
07:13 < gleki> impossible. then it's not an interjection
07:13 < gleki> en: sai'e
07:13 < mensi> sai'e = [NAhE] scalar intensifier: very... |>>> rei'e:ru'e:milxe ; noi'e:na'oi:cnano ; sai'e:sai:mutce ;
07:13 < mensi> cai'e:cai:tcetce. See http://mw.lojban.org/papri/zipcpi:scalarmodifiers |>>> spheniscine
07:13 < zipcpi> I don't like the {ge'e} interpretatin
07:13 < gleki> sai'e:sai::na'e:nai then
07:14 < zipcpi> Yep...
07:14 < gleki> okay,
07:15 < gleki> only after sumti and after brivla NAI is the same as NAhE, just afterthought
07:15 < gleki> that'd be another issue
07:15 < zipcpi> sumtcita, sumti, and brivla
07:15 < zipcpi> Yeah the attitudinals case is an exception I noted
07:15 < zipcpi> I did add a note to the CKTJ page
07:16 < zipcpi> Wanting to swap {ne'e} with {tei}, then promote it as polar negator for attitudinals instead of {nai}
07:17 < gleki> after sumtcita NAI is sometimes like NA
07:17 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/move_NAI_to_CAI#NAI_and_tags
07:17 < gleki> hm, probably the same as na'e ke
07:17 < zipcpi> Well, na is actually very much like na'e; it's just scope
07:18 < zipcpi> In that I think they mean the same thing; it's just the scoping that's different
07:18 < gleki> oh my i just recalled that ZI/VA are modifiers too, modifiers of sumtcita
07:18 < gleki> so many issues
07:19 < zipcpi> Heh...
07:19 < gleki> if bare NAI/CAI are not interjections this is confusing
07:20 < gleki> although inded they are not interjections
07:26 < gleki> then what could {mi jesai do mo} mean
07:26 < gleki> I and especially you?
07:26 < zipcpi> Maybe
07:26 < gleki> i wont allow that for now
07:27 < gleki> i temporaily named NAI/CAI compound {ckiluma'o}
07:28 < zipcpi> Oh I actually did use {zei'asai} / {dei'aru'e}
07:28 < gleki> okay i m reallowing it
07:31 < zipcpi> Hmm... maybe {basai} can mean "a long-ish time later", while {baza} repurposed. #miMUtcelokazbusuFUkai
07:32 < zipcpi> So no more bare bazi/baza/bazu; just baru'e, bana'oi, basai, bacai
07:33 < zipcpi> Well it'd fix your ZI problem at least
07:33 < zipcpi> But... zbusufukai
07:33 < clakre> why would you change that?  the zi/za/zu - vi/va/vu parallels would be lost
07:33 < zipcpi> clakre: Just rambling... cause Gleki was talking about problems with how tags should scope over each other
07:34 < zipcpi> I'm not completely serious
07:34 < clakre> u'i
07:35 < zipcpi> Though I seem to be fated for my "not completely serious" proposals to get completely out of my control and suddenly gain popular, if controversial, support
07:35 < zipcpi> So caveat emptor :p
07:36 < clakre> zo'o I think I just don't want you to change the parts I already learned :p
07:36 < zipcpi> u'i
07:42 < gleki> the parts already learnt should never be changed unless they are utter bullshit, which still sometimes happens
07:44 < zipcpi> Though I am actually quite starting to like PU+CAI for that meaning
07:44 < zipcpi> I think I might try it out
07:45 < gleki> is it {pu ze'u} or {puzu} and why
07:46 < zipcpi> puzu, because pu indicates position in respect to time
07:47 < zipcpi> So {cai'e xo'i pu} is probably better interpreted as distance rather than duration
07:48 < gleki> still ZEhA are unfortunate to be a problem
07:48 < zipcpi> I don't think ze'u need modify pu
07:48 < zipcpi> Though ze'e... hm not sure how ze'e works
07:49 < gleki> en: ze'a
07:49 < mensi> ze'a = [ZEhA] time tense interval: a medium length of time. |>>> officialdata
07:49 < gleki> en: za
07:49 < mensi> za = [ZI] time tense distance: medium distance in time. |>>> officialdata
07:49 < selpahi> I can answer your questions about ze'e
07:49 < zipcpi> ze'a dosen't modify pu at all, IMO
07:49 < gleki> so only {za} will remain
07:50 < gleki> and i think i can only accept {zasai}/{zaru'e}
07:52 < gleki> {ze'e} is a perfectly understood cmavo. The point is that it's perfectly understood in two completely different ways by two groups of Lojbanists.
07:52 < zipcpi> So then get rid of ze'i / ze'u as well, and ve'i / ve'u, even vi/ vu. Everything is CAI
07:53 < zipcpi> Only perhaps {ti/ta/tu} remains :p
07:53 <@xalbo> Those are {zo'e pe vaCAIku}.
07:53 < zipcpi> Exactly lol
07:54 < gleki> en: tu
07:54 < mensi> tu = [KOhA6] pro-sumti: that yonder; distant demonstrative it; indicated thing far from speaker&listener. |>>>
07:54 < mensi> officialdata
07:54 < gleki> more than that
07:55 <@xalbo> je'e
07:55 < zipcpi> Oh right, demonstrative
07:55 < gleki> it should be both far from the speaker and the listener
07:55 < zipcpi> Well there's also that wrinkle. But yeah there's also the whole debate about exactly how loosely to interpret "demonstrative"
07:55 < selpahi> de zei monsuta
07:56 < zipcpi> u'i
07:56 <@xalbo> selpahi: Am I to understand with your latest NA idea that {na mi citka lo plise}, {mi na citka lo plise}, and {mi citka na lo plise} would all be truth conditionally the same, and the difference would be a lot like a {kau} ({du'u mi kau citka lo plise} etc)?
07:57 < selpahi> I think that would be useful probably, maybe.
07:57 < selpahi> :)
07:57 < zipcpi> Hm... perhaps it's a bit like what {xu} tags
07:57 < zipcpi> Except that {xu} tags things before it
07:57 <@xalbo> Yes, that's maybe even a better analogy.
07:58 < zipcpi> Being a UI
07:58 < gleki> If Lojban gets 1000 votes in the FB poll, LingQ will add support for the language to their online language learning site. <-- can anyone remember what happened then? they added Lojban. So ...
07:58 <@xalbo> So {na mi citka lo plise} and {mi citka na lo plise} are like the answers to {do xu citka lo plise} and {do citka lo plise ku xu}
07:59 < zipcpi> Yeah I think so
08:00 < zipcpi> Hm... how about... {mi nai citka lo plise}, {mi citka lo plise ku nai}
08:01 < zipcpi> exp: mi nai citka lo plise
08:01 < mensi> ([mi nai] [CU {citka <lo plise KU> VAU}])
08:01 < zipcpi> off: mi nai citka lo plise
08:01 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "p" found.
08:01 < zipcpi> alta: mi nai citka lo plise
08:01 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "p" found.
08:02 < dutchie> in {mi chitka lo plise ku nai}, it seems to me that {nai} attaches only to {lo plise ku}
08:02 < dutchie> er, citka
08:02 < zipcpi> That's kinda the point
08:02 < dutchie> oh right
08:02  * dutchie looks at backscroll more thoroughly
08:03 < zipcpi> We are discussing this: http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/na-as-tag-re-visited#comments
08:08 < zipcpi> Hmm... does it mean though, that {na mi citka lo plise}; {na} only scopes over {mi}? So it'd be different from {naku mi citka lo plise}
08:13 < zipcpi> alta: mi broda
08:13 < mensi> (I [FA mi] [CU {broda NF} VAU])
08:14 < zipcpi> alta: lo broda cu brode
08:14 < mensi> (I [FA {lo <broda NF> KU}] [cu {brode NF} VAU])
08:16 < zipcpi> And to play even more with scope + NAI/CAI, there's {sei'o}, which is basically what alta represents by NF
08:18 < zipcpi> Hm, with careful placement, and even {fu'e...fu'o}, it might be possible to do very interesting things with scope
08:19 < zipcpi> And by interesting, I mean, brain-hurting :p
08:41 < zipcpi> Oh wait it was approval voting
08:41 < zipcpi> I think that means you were allowed to pick more than one option?
08:43 < zipcpi> Which is, well, not an ideal voting system (technically none are, because there are a bunch of criterion that most people would say "yes" to if asked if a fair voting system should have that feature, but it is found that it is mathematically impossible to fulfill all of them)
08:43 < zipcpi> But it's better than first-past-the-post
08:57 < gleki> sumti nai are not supported by altatufa atm
08:58 < zipcpi> Hm I think {xo'onku} - x1 is sarcastic in aspect/manner x2
08:59 < zipcpi> -nku comes from {lenku} and {kurki}
08:59 < gleki> only disambiguate between la bangu's def. of {xo'o} and {ckasu}
09:00 < zipcpi> Hmm...
09:00 < zipcpi> Maybe {xo'oksu} is better then?
09:00 < gleki> jb: xo'o
09:00 < mensi> xo'o = xo'o [interjection modifier] — verbal irony, xo'o nai — sincerely
09:00 < mensi> :je'u xo'o do ne se mau djuno — Yes, of course, you know better (sarcastically)!
09:00 < mensi> :xo'o nai sai do pu rau va'e gunka — With full sincerity, I can tell you that you worked enough.
09:00 < mensi> :Comment: For xo'o the intended meaning is the opposite of that expressed by the words used, in xo'o nai it explicitely
09:00 < mensi> marks the intended meaning as matching the words. Sarcasm isn't necessarily implied.
09:01 < gleki> do you mean verbal irony or mocking up?
09:01 < zipcpi> Hm...
09:01 < zipcpi> So that's how you interpret {xo'o}; interesting
09:02 < gleki> parallel to zo'o it's a modifier of interjections
09:02 < gleki> not a separate emotion
09:02 < zipcpi> So xo'o = verbal irony, while sarcasm is the use of verbal irony to {ckasu}
09:02 < gleki> wikipedia has more on verbal irony
09:03 < gleki> i think the second sarcam is better glossed with "to mock", yes
09:03 < gleki> i think the second sarcasm is better glossed with "to mock", yes
09:04 < zipcpi> Is there an attitudinal that specifically means "mock"
09:06 < latro`a> ga'a feels related
09:06 < gleki> ga'i
09:06 < latro`a> er, yes
09:08 < zipcpi> xo'onsku: x1 ironically says li'o...
09:09 < zipcpi> Hm {raxsku} is already defined
09:09 < zipcpi> {raxyckasu} too
09:14 < zipcpi> "generous" is in TMC list
09:14 < zipcpi> "stingy" is mobdu'a
09:17 < zipcpi> Hm how's {dudyxe'o} for "generous"?
09:20 < durka42> mi nelci i ie mi nelci
09:25 < zipcpi> $x_1$ is generous to $x_2$ in giving $x_3$
09:26 < zipcpi> bo'a xendo bo'e lo nu bo'a dunda bo'e bo'i
09:26 < durka42> x1=d1=xe1 x2=d3=xe2 x3=d2=tu'a_xe1
09:26 < zipcpi> er, bo'a dunda bo'i bo'e
09:26 < durka42> jvomekso
09:27 < durka42> xu ka'e dunda lo temci
09:27 < gleki> alta: ui uinai ro'a nai ro'a dainai dai ui
09:27 < mensi> ([I {ui <(¹[ui nai] [ro'a nai] ro'a¹) (¹dai nai¹) dai> ui}] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
09:27 < gleki> it's more complex than before
09:28 < gleki> ROhA now can string together, they dont modify each other
09:28 < gleki> DAI comes after them
09:28 < durka42> nice
09:28 < durka42> this is an internal grammar for UI?
09:28 < durka42> kinda like the internal grammar selpahi made for PA?
09:28 < zipcpi> Yep, based on some things I wrote a while back
09:29 < gleki> it's basically [(UI [ROhA+]) DAI(DAI(DAI...]
09:29 < gleki> so there are more classes now
09:29 < gleki> DAI and ROhA are different classes
09:29 < durka42> je'e
09:29 < gleki> and ... it starts to look like Ithkuil
09:29 < durka42> dai dai iei nu
09:30 < gleki> of course each of UI, ROA, DAI can be modified using NAI/CAI which dont belong to interjections at all
09:30 < zipcpi> Hm new style; move all the weird jvomekso into notes so that it will be less confusing for nintadni
09:30 < zipcpi> While still providing the often-useful information
09:31 < durka42> yes
09:31 < durka42> yes
09:31 < durka42> mi tugni i ie mi tugni
09:34 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/dudyxe'o
09:35 < zipcpi> Oh yes, because of bo'V I no longer feel obligated to write {boi} in the lojban definitions anymore lol
09:36 < durka42> I never did, I figured if $x_2$ is smart enough to replace _ with {xi} then it can handle replacing $ with {boi}, heh
09:36 < gleki> and the problem i saw with DAI is that unlike other parts of interjection grammar they should have been parsed from right to left
09:36 < zipcpi> I could just go all the way and write it with bo'V and then trick JVS with $$, but... I dunno how well that would go with some people :p
09:36 < durka42> JVS would complain :)
09:36 < zipcpi> $$
09:36 < durka42> you didn't answer my question from before though, "I am generous with my time" does {dunda} still work?
09:36 < durka42> (I lean towards yes)
09:37 < zipcpi> Oh didn't see that...
09:37 < zipcpi> I think it does work. It's might be pe'aru'e but I'm not sure how else to make it work
09:38 < zipcpi> After all you are giving up something
09:38 < zipcpi> For the benefit of someone else
09:39 < durka42> yeah
09:41 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/guglyzamgri Example of how I tricked JVS with $$ (the definition I accidentally entered into Loglan instead of Lojban)
09:42 < zipcpi> So yes, I can write pure-bo'a or ce'u definitions if I wanted to. But... *shrugs*
09:43 < zipcpi> You see, like <insert appropriate political target>, all it cares about is the dollar signs :p
09:44 < durka42> can you imagine what Wuzzy would say, plus pe'i it's easier to read the numbers in writing
09:44 < durka42> even if it's worse in speech
09:44 < zipcpi> Inorite lol
09:44 < durka42> ei cliva
09:44 < zipcpi> co'o
10:13 < zipcpi> Oh crap... there might be a use for {pinxe zei cidja} over {pinxe zei djacu}
10:13 < zipcpi> "beverage"
10:14 < zipcpi> There is {selpinxe}, but then problems over ca'a vs ka'e again
10:14 < selpahi> Already thought of that. {djalitki} (for nutritious liquids).
10:14 < zipcpi> Ah
10:42 < Ilmen> en: ka'ei
10:42 < mensi> ka'ei'a = [PA5] digit/number: Conway's look-and-say constant λ ≈ 1.303577269…
10:46 < Ilmen> In this tu'e+NU thread, people seem to use {gi'i} for gek-terminator. But why not vu'o?
10:47 < zipcpi> ... wait what
10:47 < zipcpi> Why did mensi return ka'ei'a
10:48 < zipcpi> Ilmen: I'm not sure; it's Guskant's thing; ask her :p
10:49 < zipcpi> I'm not sure vu'o quite works though? It's not really a famyma'o
10:49 < Ilmen> I already wanted for a while a ka that automatically binds ce'u slots to predefined pronoun sets, however I haven't implemented this idea yet. It seems your ka'ei is in the same vein, am I mistaken?
10:50 < zipcpi> Yes it is
10:50 < Ilmen> I'd have made it a LOhOI though, in order to save one more syllable.
10:50 < zipcpi> Ah
10:50 < Ilmen> (just like xu'u = lodu'u)
10:51 < zipcpi> Part of the problem though is that you can't use {me'ei broda cu ka'ei ...}
10:51 < zipcpi> If it's only defined by a LOhOI
10:52 < Ilmen> Originally I planned to make two or three of these autoassigning ka with the same number of pronoun sets, but kurtis took some of the cmavo I planned to use
10:52 < zipcpi> Oh
10:52 < Ilmen> xD
10:52 < zipcpi> And then I took the coveted bo'V set for that lol
10:53 < zipcpi> I don't think it's a bad use though
10:53 < Ilmen> You can use {mintu ka'ei...}
10:53 < Ilmen> X mintu mi = X mibypre
10:54 < zipcpi> I've seen mibypre, but is {mi} always a prenu?
10:54 < Ilmen> so the choice of ka'ei being a NU or a LOhOI depends on what's the most commonly desired case: sumti or selbri
10:54 < zipcpi> Cause I've been told that {mi} was a suitable pronoun for Magic cards :p
10:54 < Ilmen> ANd I'd expect sumti being by far the most common use case
10:54 < zipcpi> *self-reference pronoun
10:55 < zipcpi> Ah
10:56 < Ilmen> In any case {lo ka'ei} will always be shorter than {lo ka bo'a bo'e bo'i bo'o... ce'ai}
10:56 < zipcpi> And {lo'oi} is just {lo poi'i} / CKTJ {lo voi}. Ah, so much reinventions of wheels lol
10:57 < Ilmen> Yeah. I made lo'oi before poi'i was added to JVS though.
10:57 < Ilmen> But poi'i is more versatile and can be used with gihek as well
10:57 < zipcpi> Mhm
10:59 < Ilmen> I think I've though of one ka assigining everithing to ko'V, another one assigning everything to fo'V, and possibly a third one assigning to a third pronoun set, if deemed useful enough
10:59 < zipcpi> I've seen someone use {li'o ce'ai} then FAbu lol
10:59 < Ilmen> .u'i
11:00 < Ilmen> With FAbu, you sometimes need to use boi, though
11:01 < zipcpi> Ah... I went through a different approach. First I invented {cei'e}, then I realized that it needs something; i.e. things that mean x1 to x5, then I realized that those things are really just reassigned ce'u, so a {ka} variant might be able to "steal" them
11:01 < zipcpi> And yes I noted the boi problem
11:02 < Ilmen> In the logic symbolic language, the variable name can be freely chosen, like  ∀k [ broda(k) ]
11:02 < zahlman> coi rodo .i mi puziku glico se cfipu bu'u lo me'oi deli .i (to zarci lo rectu .e lo cirla .e lo salta .e lo se jukpa toi) .i ca lo nu pleji; lo ninmu cu te preti lo du'u xukau lo degtai ke rasyjukpa jipcyre'u cu co'e kei; zoi gy ... come out? gy
11:02 < Ilmen> which is basically {roldza fa lo ka ky ce'ai broda fa ky}
11:03 < zipcpi> Mhm. The thing is that the whole "x1~x5" thing is embedded into Lojban grammar, so I thought, why not use that set of five cmavo we were reserving for that
11:04 < zipcpi> Well, "why not" would be "to wait for something better"... but we can't do that forever :p
11:05 < Ilmen> ce'ai makes thing overly long to my tast though, whence the idea of autoassigning ka words
11:05  * zipcpi nods
11:05 < Ilmen> ce'u can gets ugly in complex nested abstraction with more than one ka level
11:06 < zipcpi> Exactly
11:06 < zipcpi> And cannot be reused unless assigned by goi
11:06 < zipcpi> or ce'ai
11:06 < zipcpi> Also cannot switch places easily
11:06 < zipcpi> So yeah lots of reasons
11:06 < zahlman> .i smuni fa lo ka te vecnu bredi .i ku'i mi pensi u'ise'i lodu'u smuni fa lo ka farlu fi lo tanxe
11:06 < Ilmen> {ce'u xi re} isn't even "the next ce'u of the second outer abstraction", it means "the second ce'u slot of the current ka"
11:07 < zipcpi> Huh, didn't know that
11:07 < Ilmen> The officially proposed solution is {ce'u xi X xi Z}
11:07 < zahlman> .i (to zo'o mi ba'e na pensi lodu'u xukau smuni fa lo ka mitcingle toi)
11:08 < Ilmen> which is uglily ugly
11:08 < zipcpi> fegli fi lo ka fegli
11:08 < zahlman> zo fegli u'i .i cnino xu
11:08 < Ilmen> ta'o je'e la .tsalman.
11:09 < Ilmen> .i cnino ĭe
11:09 < Ilmen> en: fegli
11:09 < mensi> fegli = x1 is ugly to x2 in aspect x3 |>>> See melbi. |>>> Ilmen
11:09 < zahlman> a'i clani lisri
11:12 < zipcpi> The thing that I like about bo'V is that by default, they mean x1~x5, so they can be used right away to render Lojban definitions. Then ka'ei allows you to wrap it all up in an abstraction for fancylojban purposes
11:15 < Ilmen> xN shows open slots in the predicate definition, so {ce'u} is totally suitable to render xN in Lojban definitions
11:16 < Ilmen> the only drawback is that ce'u doesn't show the slot number, so the reader has to count
11:16 < Ilmen> and you can't easily repeat back a previously used slot, as in "x1 talks about x2 to x1" (self-talk)
11:16 < zipcpi> Exactly
11:18 < Ilmen> za'a cilce xarju bu'u lo mi purdi
11:18 < zipcpi> All the same problems that {ce'ai} solves in the general case, but is too wordy for the commonly used case
11:20 < zipcpi> {ce'ai} still has some use; sometimes you might want to use a different set, sometimes you need more than one level...
11:20 < zipcpi> But yeah it's really nice to have a set that can be used by default
11:21 < zahlman> doi la ilmen ue do xabju xu lo cilce
11:21 < Ilmen> xabju fa mi fe lo cmana
11:22 < zahlman> lo nu da'i viska CX bu'u lo cmana u'e
11:25 < selpahi> Sort of relevant to your ce'ai and auto-binding {ka}: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/experimental_anaphorics
11:25 < Ilmen> sa'u me lo mamta xarju jo'u lo ri ci panzi gi'e darca tezu'e lo nu citka lo bilma fusra plise poi cpana lo cnita be lo tricu
11:26 < Ilmen> .i tepcau
11:27 < zipcpi> Oh yeah, how to fix {tu'e lo mabla cu fasnu .i lo zabna cu fasnu tu'u ca le nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e}?
11:28 < selpahi> By replacing le with lo.
11:28  * selpahi runs
11:28 < Ilmen> mi de'a jundi
11:29 < selpahi> Well the link I posted contains an option.
11:29 < selpahi> That I am not affiliated with.
11:30 < selpahi> But it's the postnex
11:31 < zahlman> u'e ui lo xarju cu sidju fi lo nu co'e lo na'e fusra
11:32 < zipcpi> {zo'au}?
11:33 < zipcpi>  {tu'e lo mabla cu fasnu .i lo zabna cu fasnu tu'u zo'au ca le nu mi stuvi'e le sralygu'e}
11:33 < zipcpi> ?
11:33 < selpahi> I think that should work, since {ca ko'a zo'u tu'e ... tu'u} works
11:34 < gleki> Ilmen: coi do noi a'o na co'u morji fi lo uenzi poi nu'o spero
11:34 < zipcpi> It'll have to be a new selma'o right?
11:36 < gleki> what do we call "tanru unit" in Lojban?
11:36 < gleki> seljvatertau?
11:36 < zipcpi> selbrisle
11:36 < zipcpi> or ziltau
11:36 < gleki> en: ziltau
11:36 < mensi> ziltau [< zi'o tanru ≈ Nonexistent it phrase compound] = t1 is a tanru component. |>>> Cf. tanru, zi'o, seltau, tertau,
11:36 < mensi> selbrisle. |>>> totus
11:36 < gleki> en: tanru
11:36 < mensi> tanru = x1 is a binary metaphor formed with x2 modifying x3, giving meaning x4 in usage/instance x5. |>>> (x2 and x3 are
11:36 < mensi> both text or both si'o concept) See also gismu, smuni. |>>> officialdata
11:36 < gleki> ziltau breaks usual rule of using zil-
11:36 < zipcpi> zi'o tanru bo'a zi'o zi'o zi'o
11:37 < zipcpi> Yeah
11:37 < gleki> en: selbrisle
11:37 < mensi> selbrisle [< se bridi selci ≈ 2nd conversion predicate cell] = x1 is a tanru unit. |>>> selbri selci; ziltau |>>>
11:37 < mensi> gusnikantu
11:38 < gleki> im slowly translating all variable names to lojban
11:38 < gleki> which means soon i'll have hard time syncing from zantufa, spagetufa etc.
11:39 < zipcpi> selpahi: *sigh*... I dunno. If I have to rely on {zo'u} and {zo'au}, then {goi'e} might have to say in COI for now
11:39 < zipcpi> I really want it to be a sumtcita
11:41 < dutchie> u'isai i read that as "i really want to be a sumtcita"
11:41 < zipcpi> Yes, it's my life's dream
11:42 < zipcpi> Can I be ze'e? Or maybe fi'o zipcpi :p
11:43 < zipcpi> Clearly a very useful tag, that needs a BAI
11:43 < dutchie> ie zo'o
11:44 <@xalbo> Go for broke and combine them: be {fi'o ze'e zipcpi}
11:44 < zipcpi> YES
11:44 < gleki> alta: fanai mi nai mo nai
11:44 < mensi> (I [{fa nai} {mi nai}] [CU {mo nai} VAU])
11:44 < zipcpi> u'i
11:44 < gleki> still doesnt work exactly as NAhE
11:45 < gleki> alta: mi na'e mo nai
11:45 < mensi> (I [FA mi] [CU {na'e <mo nai>} VAU])
11:45 < gleki> actually {na'e mo nai} should be banned
11:45 < gleki> since it's not known who wins
11:45 < selpahi> na'e [mo nai]
11:45 <@xalbo> mi jai fi'o ze'e zipcpi fe'u co'e
11:46 < selpahi> mi jai fi'o no'a fe'u nei
11:46 < zipcpi> na'e ja'a mo nai ja'ai cau'i
11:46 < zipcpi> FIGHT
11:46 < zahlman> pe'i zo'ei lo'u na'e mo nai le'u ponjo sance
11:47 < zahlman> coi si oi lo cmavo tavla
11:47 <@xalbo> .i na'e nei
11:48 < zipcpi> lol xalbo, you might have just made the shortest Lojicomix :p
11:48 < zipcpi> {na nei}. *BOOM*
11:49 < selpahi> ja'a go'o .i na go'i
11:49 <@xalbo> {na nei} is an old koan, but I'm not convinced it's as bad as people think it is, due to the way Lojban has NA overwrite each other. {na'e nei}, though, may be irredeemable.
11:49 < gleki> {na'e ja'a mo nai ja'ai } <-- this is fine
11:50 < zipcpi> tersmus: na nei
11:50 < tersmus> !nei( )
11:53 < zipcpi> ETERNAL PENGUINS FOR EVERYONE
11:57 < selpahi> zipcpi: Have you translated The Princess and The Pea yet?
11:57 < zipcpi> Huh? Is it like Sour Grapes where everyone translates it?
11:57 < zipcpi> I need to translate Sour Grapes myself lol
11:57 < selpahi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/the_Princess_and_the_Pea
11:58 < zipcpi> Ah nice
12:03 < zipcpi> "However, don't change anyone else's translations at all." lol I totally wasn't thinking of doing that <.< >.>
12:03 < selpahi> .u'i
12:04  * xalbo goes off and deletes a few essential terminators to add subtle grammatical errors, then runs away giggling, looking for a puppy to kick.
12:05 < selpahi> .u'i ca lo fanmo co'a cmila fa mi
12:05 < gleki> btw i already broke altatufa
12:05 < gleki> alta: puku mo
12:05 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] or ['hiI] but end of input found.
12:05 < selpahi> Expected ['hil] oO
12:06 < gleki> alta: puzo'e mo
12:06 < mensi> (I [pu zo'e] [CU {mo VAU}])
12:30 < zipcpi> doi gleki do ciskysre
12:30 < zipcpi> lo'u <le loxu pu bikla> le'u
12:49 < bigcentaur> coi
13:10 < zipcpi> mi mo'u fanva la'au loi slari vanjba li'u
13:13 < zipcpi> And... yeah. I didn't use as many experimental constructs as I did in that joke snippet, I still used a lot of them lol
13:13 < zipcpi> *but I still
13:20 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Sour_Grapes#loi_slari_vanjba
13:20 < zipcpi> xu mabla lo ka pilno lo malma'o iau u'i
13:25 < zipcpi> And cutting short that {nu} for an anaphora might be cheating lol
13:25 < durka42> I should make my own translation before reading yours, shouldn't i
13:25 < zipcpi> Maybe
13:27 < durka42> I'm doin it
13:31  * nuzba @s_i_d_a: carvi sisti .i    zasni tolxanka tsani    .i co'a cerni    #lojban #haiku [http://bit.ly/1JkZkZx]
13:31 < zipcpi> Er, you might want to do it in a notepad or something
13:31 < zipcpi> I just edited my own translation and I hear the wiki does bad things
13:32 < durka42> yes I am using vim of course
13:32 < durka42> and la vlaste
13:32 < zipcpi> u'i
13:41 < Ilmen> en: lau'u
13:41 < mensi> lau'u = [KOhA2] pronoun: the referent of the last utterance |>>> Equivalent to la'edi'u or lo su'u go'i; compounds
13:41 < mensi> considered common enough in usage statistics to deserve a shortening. |>>> spheniscine
13:42 < zipcpi> la .guskant. cu finti
13:43 < zipcpi> Well, she took the idea from the CKTJ page, which wanted {lau} to be {la'edi'u}
13:43 < Ilmen> mi co'u morji .i du'e cmavo ba'o se finti .i du'e cmavo pu'o go'i
13:43 < zipcpi> So she actually defined a cmavo for it, so that CKTJ will have something to swap with
13:43 < zipcpi> u'i
13:44 < durka42> haha
13:44 < Ilmen> tau zo ki'a na banzu
13:46 < zipcpi> ki'a'a ki'a'e ki'a'au ki'a'ai'a
13:46 < zipcpi> ki'a'o'e'o'e <-- elliptical metalinguistic confusion
13:46 < Ilmen> .u'i
13:48  * nuzba @evegwood: the wiki page for lgbt flags has a one line description of what the flags are in 10 languages, and one of those languages is lojban?? wh [http://bit.ly/1Jl2ixa]
13:49 <@xalbo> Make a complete set of ten ki'a'V'V, where the first V is 1-5 which of the previous five utterances was confusing, and the second is which term in it was confusing.
13:50 < zipcpi> u'i
13:50 <@xalbo> Maybe a third set of 'V corresponding to the ro'V scale for whether it was emotionally confusing, physically, etc.
13:50 < zipcpi> u'i
13:50 <@xalbo> s/ten/25/
13:50 < fenki> xalbo meant to say: Make a complete set of 25 ki'a'V'V, where the first V is 1-5 which of the previous five utterances was confusing, and the second is which term in it was confusing.
13:51 < durka42> haha wat
13:51 < durka42> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Sexual_identity_symbols#Flags
13:51 < durka42> (SFW)
13:52 < zipcpi> Awr I was thinking of something much less ambitious. Just define a joke cmavo, {ki'a'au'u'au'i} (modeled after {ci'au'u'au'i}), meaning "metalinguistic confusion caused by too many experimantal cmavo"
13:53 < durka42> .i'e .u'i
13:55  * nuzba @evegwood: lojban more like lojBANNED. because it sucks [http://bit.ly/1gEaZMf]
13:58 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/ki'a'au'u'au'i
14:14 < durka42> my translation is very gi-heavy for some reason
14:15 < zipcpi> lol
14:16 < zipcpi> ei mi cliva co'o
14:16 < durka42> co'o
14:26 < durka42> jo'au la .jacus. noi terjonma'o ciste je lo cnino me zo soi je lo ga'ezeilerfu basyvla
14:26 < durka42> .u'i
14:26 < durka42> did I miss anything
14:26 < durka42> do I have to jo'au la .dotsaid. ?
14:29 < jacus> the what you say? Got a couple of things in there I don't recognize. ;-)
14:30 < durka42> coi :)
14:30 < durka42> xu do na terjonma'o ciste
14:32 < jacus> [ struggling to say "I should think not" with the right attitude bau lojbo ]
17:51 < vultrue> Ìû
18:27 < pimlu> coi ma
19:47 < noncomcinse> en: na'oi
19:47 < mensi> na'oi = [CAI] Indicator for moderate or normal attitudinal intensity |>>> Used to indicate the "default" intensity of
19:47 < mensi> attitudinals, the intensity that is implied when for example using a bare "ui" (which is in-between "sai" and "ru'e").
19:47 < mensi> Useful mostly together with pei. Derived from cnano. |>>> ctefaho
19:48 < noncomcinse> .i pau ma'oi cai zo'u lo'u mo ru'e na'oi sai cai le'u valsi
22:10 < zipcpi> Hmm... I find in practice, I use {lo} to introduce a new object into the discourse; {lo bi'u}, or an informal {da poi} but without all the realis and scope problems of {da} that xorlo is supposed to solve
22:11 < noncomcinse> coi zy.
22:11 < zipcpi> {le} refers to something present to the discourse. Something present in both the speaker's and listener's minds
22:11 < zipcpi> Thus could be anaphora, cataphora, exophora
22:12 < noncomcinse> Exophora?
22:12 < zipcpi> Did you like *the play*? (probably the one that you just watched)
22:13 < zipcpi> It means, referring outside of the text, to something in the subtext
22:13 < noncomcinse> Is it acceptable to use {lo} for that?
22:13 < zipcpi> Yes... {lo} is completely generic
22:14 < zipcpi> I'm just observing how I personally distinguish {lo} from {le}
22:14 < zipcpi> In my own usage
22:14 < zipcpi> {lo}, post-xorlo has no bound semantic though; it's just "selbri-verb to sumti-noun"
22:16 < noncomcinse> Does zo su have an experimental use or grammar?
22:16 < zipcpi> It's {su'o} under cekitaujau dialects
22:16 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ce_ki_tau_jau
22:17 < noncomcinse> i
22:17 < noncomcinse> I almost think that's going a bit too far, breaking an i-a-u pattern.
22:17 < noncomcinse> ti ta tu, ri ra ru, si sa su,
22:17 < zipcpi> Oh
22:18 < zipcpi> I was going to say something about {su'o} not being part of such a pattern :p
23:21 < gleki> alta: puku mi mo
23:21 < mensi> (I [{pu ku} {FA mi}] [CU {mo VAU}])
23:21 < gleki> fixing => breaking => fixing
23:26 < zipcpi> The human condition, folks
23:27 < gleki> im trying to solve the major problem of programming.
23:27 < gleki> for now only for lojban
23:31 < gleki> loglan: speni
23:31 < mensi> speni = D experience/undergo/spend (interval) V.
23:31 < gleki> Ei tu speni lo ka se speni :P
23:40 < zipcpi> exp: ca gi xagji gi co'a sanji lo jisryclu
23:40 < mensi> (CU [ca gi] [CU {xagji VAU}] gi [CU {co'a sanji} {lo jisryclu KU} VAU] VAU)
23:41 < zipcpi> I'm not aware of this use of gi
23:42 < gleki> mw.lojban.org/papri/tags_as_connectives
23:42 < zipcpi> Hm seems useful
23:43 < zipcpi> off: ca gi xagji gi co'a sanji lo jisryclu
23:43 < mensi> ([ca gi] [xagji VAU] gi [{co'a sanji} {lo jisryclu KU} VAU] VAU)
23:44 < gleki> exp: je gi mo gi mo
23:44 < mensi> (CU [je gi] [CU {mo VAU}] gi [CU {mo VAU}] VAU)
23:44 < gleki> alta: jegi mo gimo
23:44 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [uU] or [yY] but "i" found.
23:44 < gleki> ofc.
23:45 < zipcpi> lol Mad proposals
23:45 < zipcpi> I actually think it might not be so mad though. I mean it's just like {ju'e gi}
23:45 < zipcpi> Or {joi gi}
23:48 < zipcpi> exp: lo lorxu poi xagji co'a sanji lo gunma be lo vanjba poi sai'e si na'e se jisra be'o poi ga'usai banro ra'i lo skospa
23:48 < mensi> ([lo {lorxu <poi (¹CU [xagji VAU]¹) KUhO>} KU] [CU {co'a sanji} {lo <(¹gunma [be {lo <vanjba (²poi [sai'e si]²) (²CU [na'e {se jisra}] VAU²) KUhO> KU} be'o]¹) (¹poi [CU {<ga'u sai> banro} {r
23:48 < mensi> a'i <lo skospa KU>} VAU] KUhO¹)> KU} VAU])
23:59 < zipcpi> coi durka42
23:59 < zipcpi> lol that {gi} is interesting
--- Day changed Fri Jul 17 2015
00:00 < zipcpi> {ki'u lo nu mi broda kei mi brode} -> {mi ki'ugi broda gi brode}
00:00 < zipcpi> WOW
00:00 < zipcpi> So useful
00:02 < durka42> basically, I hate {kei}
00:03 < zipcpi> And I might start to hate it too :p
00:03 < zipcpi> After all I did use {iau} to close two {kei}
00:07 < zipcpi> Under my idea of how two-letter rafsi work, which I haven't written down yet... sezykufygau -> kufrygase
00:07 < durka42> ua
00:07 < durka42> also, using the tag-connective staile makes the x1s more explicit
00:08 < durka42> (without repeating them)
00:08 < zipcpi> bo'a kufrygase -> bo'a sefsi lo ka ce'u kufryga ce'u -> bo'a sefsi lo ka ce'u gasnu lo ka ce'u kufra
00:08 < durka42> but that {... gi te zu'e gi ...} is a bit ridiculous
00:08 < durka42> yeah I like that
00:08 < zipcpi> Basically, ca'e Lojban is now agglutinative :p
00:09 < durka42> heh it basically already was through the lujvo system
00:09 < durka42> multi-paradigm language zo'oru'e
00:09 < zipcpi> lol
00:10 < durka42> the problem with CV rafsi is it's an even smaller space
00:10 < durka42> -se goes to {sefsi} or {selja'e} or what
00:12 < zipcpi> True...
00:13 < gleki> i hate kei but i use vau :D
00:14 < zipcpi> Maybe sefsi should be -si
00:15 < durka42> simxu is -su?
00:15 < durka42> I'm sure tsani or Ilmen has a putative list of these somewhere :)
00:15 < zipcpi> lol
00:15 < zipcpi> I thought it was la cirko who had one :p
00:15 < zipcpi> I also wanted -la for {klani}
00:16 < zipcpi> So man-hours = {pi'ai gunkyla cacra}
00:16 < zipcpi> Can convert anything into a unit
00:23 < zipcpi> The problem right now with regularized lujvo is that the order of operations aren't regularized
00:24 < zipcpi> Also the JVS chaos problem :p
00:27 < zipcpi> exp: ca gi jangalgau gi tezu'e gi sezykufygau gi cusku
00:27 < mensi> (CU [ca gi] [CU {jangalgau VAU}] gi [CU {<te zu'e> gi} {CU <sezykufygau VAU>} gi {CU <cusku VAU>} VAU] VAU)
00:27 < zipcpi> zantufa: ca gi jangalgau gi tezu'e gi sezykufygau gi cusku
00:27 < zantufa> (CU [ca gi] [jangalgau VAU] [gi {<te zu'e> gi} {sezykufygau VAU} {gi <cusku VAU>} GIhI VAU] GIhI VAU)
00:27 < zipcpi> u'i
00:27 < durka42> it doesn't break
00:28 < zipcpi> Oh right because it's in the second place
00:28 < durka42> well JVS won't let you enter relyle'ujvo right now
00:28  * zipcpi nods
00:29 < durka42> tersmus: ly ca gi jangalgau gi tezu'e gi sezykufygau gi cusku
00:29 < tersmus> EX x1. (x1=. jangalgau(l) /\ (ca)(x1). EX x2. (x2=. sezykufygau(l) /\ (te zu'e)(x2). cusku(l)))
00:29 < durka42> wat .u'i
00:29 < durka42> tersmus: jbo: ly ca gi jangalgau gi tezu'e gi sezykufygau gi cusku
00:29 < tersmus> su'o da zo'u ge fi'o du da zo'u ly jangalgau gi ca da su'o de zo'u ge fi'o du de zo'u ly sezykufygau gi te zu'e de zo'u ly cusku
00:30 < durka42> a wild existential quantifier appeared!!
00:30 < zipcpi> Though perhaps then, relyle'ujvo would have to be treated a bit like {za'ure'u} / {baze'e} cmavo clusters. Not *defined* in terms of any natural language construct; the definition is only meant to tie it with a simple concept found in English (or whatever natural language you can find)
00:30 < zipcpi> Like {certyzegasi} ~  "practice"
00:31 < zipcpi> (which we already have {crezenzu'e} / {crenzuue} for, which incidentally I'm a bit confused as to whether {zukte} should actually work that way
00:32 < durka42> -ze = ?
00:32 < zipcpi> zenba
00:33 < durka42> sefsi lo ka gasnu lo ka zenba lo ka certu?
00:33 < durka42> I don't see where {sefsi} comes from
00:33 < durka42> why not just certyzezu
00:34 < zipcpi> bo'a gasnu lo nu bo'a
00:34 < zipcpi> bo'a gasnu lo nu bo'a zenba
00:34 < durka42> ah
00:34 < durka42> still seems excessive
00:35 < zipcpi> That might be part of the problem. Is {se zukte} always a ka tying it to x1, or it is just {gasnu} with a purpose?
00:35 < durka42> the second one
00:35 < zipcpi> Yeah, hence the need for the sefsi...
00:35 < durka42> yeah I guess
00:35 < durka42> I'm not sure it needs to be so explicit
00:36 < zipcpi> That's what we have zi'evla for
00:37 < durka42> nah
00:37 < durka42> it's impossible to always include all the necessary rafsi in a lujvo
00:37 < durka42> that way leads to German
00:37 < zipcpi> u'i
00:38 < zipcpi> I hear a common kid's game in German is basically la jvozba selkei
00:41 < zipcpi> The thing is that in {certyzega}, -> bo'a gasnu lo nu ba'e*bo'e* zenba lo ka certu bo'i
00:42 < zipcpi> So the -si- would be needed to condense x1 and x2
00:43 < durka42> yeah I get it
00:43 < durka42> jbo:crenzuue
00:43 < mensi> crenzuue = .i lo si'o crenzuue cu si'o ce'u goi x1 zukte lo ka ce'u zenba lo ka ce'u certu ce'uxici goi
00:43 < mensi> x2
00:43 < zipcpi> Crap, ce'u-goi staile
00:44 < durka42> oisai
00:44 < durka42> now I forget what ce'u-subscripts mean
00:44 < zipcpi> Exactly why I took bo'V lol
00:44 < durka42> I think ce'uxici means "jump three levels"
00:44 < durka42> well, two levels, since one-indexing
00:44 < durka42> so it's back up on the level of the first ce'u
00:45 < durka42> so yeah it's correct
00:45  * zipcpi faceplants
00:46 < zipcpi> I think gasnu + sefsi would be a frequent combination
00:47 < durka42> or zukte + sefsi
00:47  * zipcpi nods
00:49 < zipcpi> Also my thinking is that any brivla can be mutated by 'yGA
00:49 < zipcpi> broda'yGA
00:49 < zipcpi> sormei'yGA
00:49 < durka42> that might work...
00:49 < durka42> unless it breaks the morphology somehow
00:50 < zipcpi> Gismu is special in that their final vowel can be elided. Also any lujvo that ends with full-gismu-rafsi
00:50 < durka42> sure
00:51 < durka42> I'm just worried this will introduce new classes of tosmabru and slinku'i and stuff
00:51 < zipcpi> Yeah maybe... I don't think it does though. 'yX already is used for zi'ervlajvo, and combinations of relrafsi aren't valid zi'evla
00:52 < durka42> does {setca'yga} break up?
00:52 < zipcpi> seTCA'yga
00:52 < durka42> {setca'iga} breaks
00:53 < zipcpi> setca'i'yga
00:53 < durka42> well -y- isn't accepted in zivla right now so we can't check
00:53 < durka42> but as long as {tca'yga} isn't valid...
00:53 < durka42> spagetufa: setca'yga
00:53 < spagetufa> (CU [setcà'y/ga VAU])
00:53 < durka42> wat
00:53 < zipcpi> I tried coining {zivla} but it clashes with {zivle}
00:54 < durka42> ah
00:54 < zipcpi> So I had to settle for {zevla} :p
00:54 < durka42> vlaste: zivla (janli)
00:54 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/zivla
00:54 < zipcpi> vlaste: zivla (gimka)
00:54 < vlaste> zo zivla gimkamsmikezypro zo zivle noi catni gismu .i zo zivla gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
00:55 < durka42> vlaste: zivla (janli)
00:55 < vlaste> zo zivla gimkamsmikezypro zo zivle noi catni gismu .i zo zivla gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
00:55 < durka42> vlaste: zevla (janli)
00:55 < vlaste> zo zevla gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo zevla gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
00:59 < zipcpi> So yeah now they all have gismu. gismu, cmavo, lujvo, zevla, brivo, cmevo.
01:01 < zipcpi> And apparently {.i} is an experimental cmavo :p
01:01 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/.i
01:11 < zipcpi> spagetufa: setca'i'yga
01:11 < spagetufa> (CU [set/ca'ì'y/ga VAU])
01:12 < zipcpi> spagetufa: spageti'yga
01:12 < spagetufa> (CU [spagetì'y/ga VAU])
01:12 < zipcpi> spagetufa: sormei'yga
01:12 < spagetufa> (CU [sor/mèi'y/ga VAU])
01:42 < zipcpi> spagetufa: certyzegasi
01:42 < spagetufa> (CU [certy/ze/gà/si VAU])
01:46 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/comments.html?valsi=29376;commentid=2320;definition=0 <- tu krinu lo nu mi no'e nelci le si'o jvomi'u
01:46 < durka42> spagetufa: spagetufa
01:46 < spagetufa> (CU [spagetùfa VAU])
01:46 < durka42> is Wuzzy being annoying again
01:47 < zipcpi> ma'i do cau'a go'i
01:49 < durka42> that a search for {pinxydja} should return {pixydja} is a valid point (and it is already working in every search engine besides jbovlaste
01:50 < durka42> but downvoting isn't the solution
01:50 < durka42> )
01:50 < zipcpi> But... yeah... that's kinda part of the problem. Needing to always use the lowest-scoring jvova'i forms means that e.g. {zi'ervlajvo}, which already has to be mutated to avoid tosmabru, would have to be {zifyvlajvo}.
01:50 < zipcpi> mutce lo ka mabla
01:50 < durka42> jvomi'u doesn't mean you have to use the lowest scoring form
01:50 < durka42> where did you get that idea
01:50 < durka42> you can use the one that sounds best, without fear that it's actually different word! :)
01:51 < zipcpi> Right I mix up jvomi'u vs jvova'i
01:51 < zipcpi> But yeah not being able to search for jvomi'u forms is a problem
01:51 < zipcpi> And jvova'i probably should die except as a kind of suggestion
01:54 < zipcpi> No one can calculate that in their heads anyway
01:54 < durka42> it never was more than a suggestion
01:54 < durka42> that "database sweep" that jvs talks about has never been done and never iwll be
01:54 < zipcpi> lol
01:55 < zipcpi> It will be done some time after CLL v2 and Half Life 3 comes out :p
01:58 < zipcpi> lo zu'o ni'udzau nasai danfu
01:58 < zipcpi> (Does anyone ever use {zu'o}? lol
01:58 < zipcpi> )
01:59 < zipcpi> I used it a lot when first learning Lojban
01:59 < zipcpi> Mostly in place of {ka} before I understood {ka}
02:01 < gleki> durka42: when i search for {klamygau} in vlasisku it doesnt output klagau
02:02 < durka42> oh was I lying
02:02 < gleki> sutysisku and vlasisku only do the split
02:02 < durka42> vlaste does it
02:02 < vlaste> 113 results: frili, gasnu, mirli, ractu, ceirnalju'o, da'erzu'e, deptsa, flizu'e, jaxpu'a, jibykai…
02:02 < zipcpi> oi ko se tacpe'u lo xagji sofybakni
02:03 < durka42> ue my vlasisku is broken somehow
02:03 < gleki> vlaste is not vlasisku
02:03 < vlaste> 16182 results: notci, bakfu, bakni, bakri, baktu, balji, balni, balre, balvi, bancu…
02:04 < gleki> maybe i should implement such thing for sutysisku
02:04 < gleki> en: klamygau
02:04 < mensi> klagau [< klama gasnu ≈ Come(s) bring about] = x1 brings x2 to x3
02:08 < zipcpi> imo relyle'ujvo is not meant to completely replace -gau and friends. It still does have some use for lujvo like this: http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/rebdesygau
02:08 < zipcpi> And common ones like {muvgau} might still be used
02:08 < zipcpi> But yeah rebdeskyga / rebdeskygasi won't work because then we'd have to define {rebdesku}, which might not be a very useful concept
02:09 < Ilmen> sligau lo rebla?
02:09 < Ilmen> en: tolbirti
02:09 < mensi> [< to'e birti ≈ Polar opposite certain] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
02:09 < mensi> tolbirti[7937], to'erbirti[9526]
02:11  * nuzba @_Vanessa_sary_: @willingtheweird But a somewhat decent conversation I suppose. I'm not good at Lojban, really. I stuck with French [http://bit.ly/1I88KwY]
02:11 < Ilmen> Why do you think that the polar opposite of "being certain that X is true" is "being certain that X is false"? Why wouldn't it be "not being certain at all"?
02:12 < zipcpi> Hm that's part of the problem with scales isn't it
02:12 < Ilmen> The basis for the proposal of {ju'onai} for incertitude was that to'e birti is incertitude
02:12 < Ilmen> But at any rate to'e birti is undefined
02:12 < zipcpi> Right
02:13 < Ilmen> ta'o coi
02:13 < zipcpi> coi
02:13 < zipcpi> Yeah I have a feeling that scales might be ambiguous in some situations
02:13 < zipcpi> But I'm not very good at actually coming up with a clear example
02:14 < zipcpi> But yeah perhaps it is quite possible for {to'e broda} to be interpreted very differently, depending on what {broda} is
02:15 < Ilmen> I have a feeling that to'e+selbri (polar opposition) is not fully compositional, as if the meaning of to'e+selbri should be part of that of {selbri} or defined separately
02:15 < Ilmen> but maybe I'm wrong
02:16 < zipcpi> In fact that's part of the problem I noted with {ba'a}, because the scale there works very differently from most of the others
02:16 < zipcpi> Well my motivation is comparing it with the other evidentials {UI2}
02:17 < Ilmen> Yes, {ba'a} is an oddball
02:17  * zipcpi nods
02:17 < zipcpi> That's why I made {kai'e}, {lai'i}, {vei'i}, and {moi'i}
02:18 < zipcpi> Though... cmavo proliferation
02:18 < zipcpi> ki'a'au'u'au'inmo fa roda
02:18 < durka42> you will be subject to economic sanctions from the signatories of the Cmavo Non-Proliferation Act of 2010
02:18 < Ilmen> I also wonder whether {cnino} is equal to {to'e slabu} or {to'e fange}.
02:18 < zipcpi> to'e laldo you mean?
02:19 < Ilmen> .u'i
02:19 < Ilmen> to'e laldo is citno.
02:19 < zipcpi> Hm
02:19 < Ilmen> lo ka to'e laldo cu ka citno
02:20 < Ilmen> er, earlier I meant:
02:20 < Ilmen> I also wonder whether {slabu} is equal to {to'e cnino} or {to'e fange}.
02:20 < Ilmen> Silly me.
02:21 < zipcpi> Ah
02:22 < zipcpi> xu do djuno lo du zo .i je'a cipra cmavo // http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/.i
02:22 < Ilmen> I guess that to'e cnino is "to be known since a long time"
02:23 < Ilmen> While "to'e fange" would be just "X is familiar to Y (regardless of how long it has been so)"
02:23 < zipcpi> .i: experimental cmavo
02:23 < zipcpi> Guess before I came along, no one separated their sentences. It all just ran together
02:23 < Ilmen> or something like that
02:24 < zipcpi> Hm
02:24 < Ilmen> jbo: fange
02:24 < mensi> fange = x1 frica lo se tcaci be x2 x3 |>>> frica; tcaci; cizra; rirci; fadni |>>>
02:24 < mensi> xorxes
02:25 < Ilmen> jbo: cnino
02:25 < mensi> cnino = lo nu x1 ckaji x3 cu pu zi co'a se sanji x2 .i x1 to'e slabu x2 x3 |>>> xorxes
02:25 < Ilmen> jbo: slabu
02:25 < mensi> slabu = lo nu x1 ckaji x3 cu pu zu co'a se sanji x2 .i x1 to'e cnino x2 x3 |>>> ckaji; sanji; cnino |>>>
02:25 < mensi> xorxes
02:25 < zipcpi> ca'edai doi xorxes
02:25 < durka42> .i'e
02:25 < Ilmen> en: fange
02:25 < mensi> fange = x1 is foreign/alien/[exotic]/unfamiliar to x2 in property x3 (ka). |>>> For the sense of alien (not from Earth),
02:25 < mensi> see kesfange. See also cizra, jbena, ckini. |>>> officialdata
02:27  * nuzba @willingtheweird: @_Vanessa_sary_ You have yet to comprehend the beauty of lojban.        .i do na jimpe le melbi pe la lojban [http://bit.ly/1Jmqkb3]
02:28 < zipcpi> Isn't it {le te melbi be fi la .lojban.}
02:28 < durka42> yes
02:28 < durka42> lo te melbi cu nenri lo kanla be lo melbi
02:29 < zipcpi> :p
02:29 < durka42> no wait
02:29 < durka42> lo te melbi cu nenri lo kanla be lo se melbi
02:29 < durka42> that's how to remember the places, maybe :)
02:29 < Ilmen> .u'i
02:30 < zipcpi> Funnily on the TMC list there is "Red is a pretty color"; I translated it as {lo ka xunre cu melbi}, but I'm not sure if people would be screaming type error lol
02:30 < durka42> how about {lo ka xunre cu te melbi}
02:30 < zipcpi> fi ma
02:31 < durka42> exactly
02:31 < durka42> or just {melbi skari}, I guess that doesn't satisfy the TMC list somehow‽
02:31 < zipcpi> Dunno lol
02:31 < durka42> lo ka xunre cu te melbi -- redness is a way in which some things are pretty
02:31 < zipcpi> TMC list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LH_bawafDZBp5h4shGoajnTU7sttOilfpyxqUD4B5BM/edit#gid=0
02:31 < zipcpi> Hm
02:32 < durka42> ooh the first one looks like a good use case for {tankomo} :)
02:32 < zipcpi> lol tankomo
02:32 < zipcpi> ma vlakra
02:33 < zipcpi> lo spanybau
02:33 < durka42> go'i
02:33 < durka42> vlaste: tankomo
02:33 < vlaste> tankomo = x1 (agent) does x2 (property of x1) as much as it/he/she/they x3 (relation between x1 and x2)
02:33 < zipcpi> Wait a minute...
02:34 < durka42> maybe not
02:34 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/toltankomo
02:34 < durka42> vlaste: toltankomo
02:34 < vlaste> tankomo = x1 (agent) does x2 (property of x1) as much as it/he/she/they x3 (relation between x1 and x2)
02:34 < zipcpi> ... but the English definition is in "lojban" o.o
02:34 < durka42> ah what
02:34 < durka42> yes
02:34 < zipcpi> oi oi oi oi oi
02:34 < durka42> that should be fixed lol
02:34 < Ilmen> xD
02:35 < durka42> Ilmen want to fix that?
02:35 < Ilmen> vi'o mi'e fuzme
02:35 < durka42> sa'u mi na djica lo nu ki'ugi cikre gi finti simlu
02:35 < durka42> ka*
02:37 < Guest12507> so
02:37 < durka42> coi vitke
02:39 < Ilmen> mulfau
02:39 < durka42> ki'e
02:40 < zipcpi> coi la cmecau vombatu
02:40 < Ilmen> nau zo'u .e'u gau do lo fagri cu carvi lo lojbo glibau velski
02:41 < Ilmen> coi la so rau mei
02:44 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/cmecau
02:45 < Ilmen> .i'e terbri krasi notci
02:45 < Ilmen> ja'e lo nu lo velski na se terpa lo cnino vitke
02:46 < zipcpi> Exactly
02:46 < zipcpi> Provides the useful information, without cluttering up the definition
02:46 < Ilmen> zo cmecau pu so'i roi se pilno
02:47 < Ilmen> .i so'i seju so'o
02:48 < zipcpi> ca ciska lo jbobau velcki
02:48 < zipcpi> mo'u
02:48 < zipcpi> x1 claxu lo cmene be x1 bei x2 .i va'i noda cmene x1 x2
02:49 < zipcpi> lol example of xorlo
02:49 < zipcpi> Otherwise that would be a contradiction
02:49 < Amnadya> Attàwîl.
02:51 < Amnadya> x1 claxu lo ka su'o da cmene ce'u x2
02:51 < zipcpi> Yeah I guess that's one way to avoid irrealis-lo
02:54 < zipcpi> Oh you defined claxu-2 to be a ka
02:59 < Amnadya> coi pinxydja zvasku
03:02 < Amnadya> doi la cliva
03:02 < Amnadya> .i ke'u ke'u do mo la durka kunoi zvati lo dotygu'e ca'o
03:09 < cliva> je'e je'e mojgau .i la'a mi lazni ja me'au lo simsa
03:10 < Amnadya> ma smuni .i xu platu su da
03:10 < Amnadya> .i xu tolmo'i
03:10 < Ilmen> la .durkas. nu'o mlauca lodu lifri makau
03:10 < Ilmen> pe lo dotygu'e
03:10 < cliva> .aidji lo ka jungau fe ji'a lo drata ke tsurixi lojbo
03:11 < Amnadya> .i sa'u mi nu'o zu'ejdi lo ka klama .i da'i lo nu do klama cu banzu lo nu lo nu mi klama cu lakne
03:11 < Amnadya> .i lo sorpeka zo'u cacra li bi
03:11 < Ilmen> .i pensi lo nu pensi'u ma
03:11 < Amnadya> la'a la .franfurt.  (to pau toi)
03:11 < Ilmen> wa
03:11 < gleki> Ilmen: ma nuzba lo spero te traduki
03:12 < cliva> pau se'i ja'ai
03:12 < Amnadya> ga ja la .franfurt. gi la .tubinen.
03:12 < Ilmen> .i ca pi so'i lo prulamdei mi skami darno .i ja'e bo mi nu'o co'e doi la gleki .i ku'i mi morji ja'a
03:13 < Amnadya> .u'i .oi la .tubinen. cu ba'e zmadu la .franfurt. lo ka zvada'o mi
03:13 < cliva> .ai mi simkarbi lo ni do'e mi darno ja cu kargu
03:14 < cliva> .i ta'o mi pinxe lo pinxyci'a noi jisra vau fa noi pinxyska je cu va'i ciska fau lo nu pinxe ku fi lo pinxyka'i no'oi ka da ce'ai lo ge jibni be lo korbi be da gi nenri be da cu skadu'i soi snuti vau lo bartu be da kei fau noi nu pinxe se pi'o lo pinxykra noi jbini lo moklu jo'u lo kabri no'u lo pinxyra'i
03:14 < Amnadya> su'a lo trene na'o jai kargu .i je lo sorpeka na'o jai to'e kargu
03:15 < Amnadya> ... .u'i
03:15 < Amnadya> ma fasnu
03:15 < gleki> cliva: la .uuZIT. ja'e bazi spoja
03:15 < cliva> mi ji'a ba'o ja ca'o spoja
03:17 < Amnadya> ko mo kau .i ku'i lo zi'ejvo ne mu'a zo pinxydja je zo zvasku cu jai ri'a xruti fai mi lo ka nelci lo jbobau .i ga'a mi ro rinka be ru cu xamgu .i so'o roi pu senpi lo ro da pe lo jbobau je pu zukpei lo ka cliva
03:21 < Amnadya> .i mu'i lo nu xebni ro lujvo pu pilno ji'i no lujvo tu'a lo .itca .i ku'i ca ti mi co'a kufra
03:22 < gleki> uanai
03:23 < Amnadya> .i .ei mi
03:27 < cliva> ro lo re tcadu zo'u mapti mi
03:34 < gleki> fi ma
03:34 < gleki> i la ropnyfesti vau xu
03:34 < cliva> go'i
03:35 < cliva> .i lo ni festi zo'u ba'a ba facki
03:36 < zipcpi> xazdmru = x1 a word in a particular class of zi'evla (x2) that contains syllabic sonorant x3, which when "filled out" by {y}, becomes lujvo x4, which makes it hard to distinguish to x5, which causes Lojbanist x6 (default la zipcpi) to think it should be banned altogether
03:36 < cliva> ku'i zo'oi xazdmru xa'o canci lo te gerna
03:37 < cliva> exp: xazdmru
03:37 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "x" found.
03:37 < zipcpi> i'e
03:38 < gleki> ie lo nalgendra valsi cu banli
03:38 < gleki> i ku'i gendra ma'i lo u zei bangu
03:39 < zipcpi> "Sorry, that isn't actually a word in Lojban." Hmm maybe it should have an appropriate message
03:39 < zipcpi> "This is a xazdmru word and not allowed"
04:01 < cliva> durka42: sei xu xa'o djuno ma noi djedi cu traji co mapti lo ke da'i ronjbofesti
04:01 < durka42> xm xm
04:03 < durka42> gaje lo xavdei ca lo lecydo'i gi lo zeldei cu mapti mi
04:04 < durka42> ji'a lo balvi be lo revomoi co djedi cu mapti
04:04 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/kralyma'u
04:04 < durka42> ca ri mi zifre .i za'o na jdice lo ka vitke makau
04:04 < zipcpi> Ah crap
04:05 < cliva> je'e
04:05 < zipcpi> I can't think of a better definition than "x1 is old enough to do x2 according to x3", which kinda loses the clarity of {krali}
04:05 < durka42> po'o mi vofli teka'a la .frankfrt. ca lo resomoi
04:06 < cliva> ti'e la .amnadja cu se cinri lo nu da'i ri kansa
04:06 < zipcpi> Or just $x_1$ is a legal adult (but maybe {flalu} is better than that, because legal-adulthood comes both with rights *and* responsibilities)
04:06  * zipcpi shrugs
04:07 < durka42> la .amnadja cu mo
04:07 < cliva> mo dai no'oi mo
04:08 < zipcpi> kralyma'u might still be useful though... for "old enough to drink alcohol" or something
04:09 < durka42> ma du la .amnadja
04:09 < cliva> la selpa'i
04:14 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/fuzma'u // ja'o mi pofygau JVS
04:14 < zipcpi> lo valsi poi se jbovlaste jeku'i cu se ciksi fo no da
04:14 < cliva> pa jinga cu se menre do
04:15 < cliva> (to ge'e selsmudukti ru'e lo se fanva toi)
04:17 < durka42> ua
04:17 < durka42> xunai la selpa'i cu xabju la bergu linji
04:18 < cliva> go'i .i zukpei lo ka (to ju'o cu'i toi) klama la frankoforte
04:18 < durka42> ua
04:19 < zipcpi> By the way has someone come up with a specific brivla for age beyond just {jai nanca}?
04:20 < durka42> ma nilcla F boi B
04:21 < cliva> lo barda .i treki'o li 550
04:21 < durka42> ua lo trene noi jai se ditcu lo cacra be li vo
04:21 < cliva> ku'i za'a li'ai ICE jai kargu
04:23 < zipcpi> What is this Flatland translation on the punctuation page
04:23 < durka42> ua .i mi na se slabu
04:23 < zipcpi> That might be an interesting translation, but come on, we don't even have proper words for dimensionality
04:23 < zipcpi> Which is, kinda central to that story
04:23 < durka42> la rupnrxiiuro be li ji'i panono
04:24 < durka42> judrysni?
04:24 < zipcpi> Which is related to what we're supposed to do with {canlu}
04:24 < durka42> lo lanzu mi .e'ende lo ka vitka la .berlin.
04:25 < zipcpi> I believe that "at least three dimensions" thing should be dropped, and {canlu} just meaning "room / space" in the sense of being able to fit
04:25 < zipcpi> Thus also able to be used for "hard drive space"
04:25 < durka42> ku'i lo cacra be li so cu jdima
04:26 < durka42> zipcpi: ie .i we already use it for "gismu canlu"
04:29 < durka42> cliva: tezu'e lo nu vitke B zo'u da'i .ei mi renli'u ze'a piso'i lo remumoi co djedi jecu lecylerci cliva ca lo resomoi
04:29 < durka42> y
04:30 < durka42> s/lecylerci/lirclira
04:30 < fenki> durka42 meant to say: cliva: tezu'e lo nu vitke B zo'u da'i .ei mi renli'u ze'a piso'i lo remumoi co djedi jecu lirclira cliva ca lo resomoi
04:30 < zipcpi> {mivyselna'a}
04:31 < zipcpi> verba: x1 is a child/kid/juvenile [a young person] of age x2, immature by standard x3.
04:31 < zipcpi> oi
04:31 < zipcpi> "of age x2"?
04:31 < zipcpi> This is like {batke} having a {fi'o kosmu} place without there actually being a word for {kosmu} lol
04:32 < zipcpi> And why must a batke have a kosmu
04:32 < zipcpi> Can't there be buttons that don't do anything
04:33 < cliva> durka42: je'e .i ka'e ka'e (to jo'a toi) pensi'u bu'u lo jbini
04:33 < durka42> zipcpi: that's not the common case
04:33 < gleki> alta: ganai mo gi mo
04:33 < mensi> (I [CU {ga nai} {<FA ZOhE> <CU (¹mo VAU¹)>} gi {<FA ZOhE> <CU (¹mo VAU¹)>} VAU])
04:33 < gleki> alta: i broda noi mo
04:33 < mensi> (i [FA ZOhE] [CU {FASNU <FA (¹LO [NU {<FA ZOhE> <CU (²broda NF²) VAU>} KEI] KU¹) (¹noi [{FA ZOhE} {CU <mo VAU>}] KUhO¹)> VAU}])
04:35 < gleki> fixed what i broke earlier
04:35 < gleki> (nobody even noticed)
04:43 < f8l> Was there no test for that?
04:44 < durka42> cliva: ko mi jungau
04:45 < gleki> it's a good question. we need a long text checking for all possible rules
04:46 < Amnadya> ue xu do klama la .berlin.
04:46 < Amnadya> doi la durka42
04:46 < Amnadya> .i xu cumki
04:46 < durka42> mi na djuno
04:46 < durka42> stidi fa lo lanzu
04:46 < durka42> ku'i darno
04:46 < Amnadya> .i la danmo cu cusku fi mi fe lu mi zvati la .berlin. co'a lo re ji'i moi pe la .bivmast. je co'u lo mu ji'i moi li'u
04:46 < Amnadya> .i .ai mi penmi
04:47 < durka42> ua
04:47 < durka42> mi zvati lo merko ca piro lo .bivmast. uinai
04:47 < Amnadya> je'e
04:48 < Amnadya> .i .y ta'o da'i mi sipna zai ma
04:49 < gleki> lo ckana
04:49 < Amnadya> .i tau lo xotli cu kargymau tau lo sorpeka
04:49 < gleki> do ca litru ibo xu
04:50 < Amnadya> ri mo
04:50 < Amnadya> sa sa
04:50 < Amnadya> .i na litru
04:50 < gleki> i ma fasnu
04:50 < durka42> mi na djuno .i ba lo revomoi mi na ternupcpe fi lo xotli
04:50 < Amnadya> la durka cu zvati lo dotygu'e .i je mi je la cirko cu zukpei lo ka penmi
04:50 < gleki> ua ua
04:51 < durka42> xu lo gacri ckana je cersai cu co'e
04:51 < gleki> i je'u logji festi
04:51 < gleki> i e'u do cpedu  fi LLG fe tu'a lojdini vau zo'onai
04:52 < durka42> xunai do zgana lo nu mi cikna ca lo ropno co'e iau .u'i
04:52 < Amnadya> .u'e .i mi na pu pensi lo noi nu go'i ku'o cumki
04:52 < durka42> xu jimpe lo tanru .u'i
04:53 < durka42> ua do sitna lo se stidi be la gleki jenai mi
04:53 < Amnadya> go'i
04:55 < gleki> lo nu lo ci do penmi zu'ai cu frica lo LLG nu penmi vau ma poi ralju
04:56 < gleki> i pe'i frica i frica fi lo nu lo do nu penmi cu vajni zmadu u'i
04:56 < Amnadya> ki'u ma do cusku di'u
04:56 < gleki> i ji'a ki'u ma do na invite la nulern  tu'a lo dotco gugde
04:57 < gleki> i kargu mleca
05:26 < durka42> iepei
05:27 < mensi> ba'e mi na tugni
05:34 < gleki> la nulern cu jibni zmadu
05:36 < durka42> zvati ma
05:36 < durka42> lo gligu'e xunai
05:42 < gleki> go'i
05:45  * nuzba @bakkasel: Esperanto is now on Duolingo. I'd prefer to learn lojban because it's so different and logical. I'll give it a go though. [http://bit.ly/1J4wmBs]
05:46 < gleki> i lo gligu'e cu jibni zmadu lo merko
06:08 < Amnadya> The recent changes to Ithkuil have made it almost ridiculously easy.
06:11 < Amnadya> (relatively speaking)
06:24 < Amnadya> One thing that apparently only a lojbanist would find (possibly) wrong with Ithkuil is the lack of a question word and the supposed workaround
06:24 < Amnadya> You can't ask "What are you doing?" or "How did you do it?" in Ithkuil
06:25 < Amnadya> you are forced to say "State the thing you are doing" and "State the method by which you did it".
06:26 < Ilmen> je'e
06:26 < Amnadya> In other words, ithkuil conflates "lo broda" and "lo du'u ma kau broda"
06:26 < Amnadya> At least that's what it looks like to me
06:27 < Ilmen> Seems so
06:28 < Ilmen> {.e'o jungau mi lodu'u do makau zukte},  {ca'e mi do cpedu be lo ka jungau mi lodu'u do makau zukte}
06:29 < Amnadya> ie
06:29 < Amnadya> .i ku'i naku drani fa lu ko jungau mi lo zukte li'u
06:29 < zipcpi> Oh... basically questions are restated as commands
06:30 < Ilmen> go'i lu jungau lo se zukte li'u
06:30 < Amnadya> Yes, that part is fine with me, but the raising is ... unsettling
06:30 < Amnadya> "What time is it?" -> "Please indicate the time of day"
06:30 < zipcpi> ko jungau mi ...
06:30 < zipcpi> But then no makau
06:30 < zipcpi> Oh btw just for a lark: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Eulojban
06:30 < Amnadya> It's logically inaccurate to rephrase it like that
06:31 < Ilmen> How do one say {mi djuno lo du'u ma kau sipna} in Iþkuîl?
06:31 < Ilmen> *does
06:32 < zipcpi> Maybe it's like {mi djuno (tu'a?) lo sipna}
06:32 < Amnadya> I don't know. I think it would become mi djuno lo sipna
06:32 < Ilmen> je'e
06:32 < zipcpi> No tu'a even T.T
06:33 < Amnadya> No tu'a at all. Ithkuil is full of implicit raising. {ri'a do} etc
06:33 < Ilmen> Iþkuîl doesn't like vagueness, so there's probably no co'e/zo'e/do'e/tu'a/...
06:33 < Amnadya> Here is the best example:
06:34 < Amnadya> (example of Qijada trying to be exact but Lojban still being more exact)
06:34 < zipcpi> Though I dunno, I hear you wanted to get rid of {kau} in Toaq Dzu, and I'm not exactly sure how lol
06:34 < zipcpi> Oh hey silly idea
06:34 < zipcpi> Instead of going makau makau makau
06:34 < Amnadya> In Ithkuil, guns, catapults, slings and all other firearms or devices for shooting/hurling projectiles utilize Degree 1 of the UTE suffix ('tool/implement for doing X'), as it is not the firearm/shooting device that kills but the projectile shot/fired from it. Thus a gun is a "bullet-implementer".  Care must be taken in assigning appropriate noun C
06:34 < Amnadya> ases or verbal Formats to stems associated with ballistic aerial weapons to distinguish the fact that it is the projectile that is the actual "weapon" and not the object it was fired/projected from. This is the good old "shoot bullets" vs. "shoot guns" vs. "shoot bullets from a gun" vs. "shoot him with a gun" vs. "shoot him with bullets from a gun"
06:34 < Amnadya>  problem . This would translate into Ithkuil as "I bulleted him due to/enabled by a gun" or incorparatively as "I gun-bulleted him" using either the RESULTATIVE Format (literally translating as "I bulleted him as a result of concurrently gun-activating") or the INSTRUMENTATIVE Format (literally translating as "I bulleted him by the enabling means o
06:34 < Amnadya> f gun-activating").
06:34 < zipcpi> Why not just put the {kau} right after {du'u}?
06:35 < Amnadya> So in Ithkuil a bullet kills people, but in Lojban it doesn't. The bullet hitting you kills you
06:35 < zipcpi> Hahahaha
06:36 < Ilmen> Well, I don't think {ri'a do} is nonsensical, but probably most often inappropriate. If events and objects are a single type, then "do" would be like "da doipre"
06:37 < Ilmen> *lonu da doipre
06:37 < Ilmen> ju'o cu'i
06:39 < Amnadya> Yes, sure.
06:40 < Amnadya> zipcpi: Toaq Dzu has no {kau} because it has no {ma}.
06:40 < Amnadya> The word it has is already like {makau}
06:40 < zipcpi> So then you have something to mark the illocutionally "Tell me this fact"?
06:40 < zipcpi> Interesting
06:41 < Amnadya> Yes. "tell me who took my ball"
06:42 < Amnadya> It's still shorter than both English and Lojban zo'o
06:42 < zipcpi> off: lo du'u kau ma lebna lo mi bolci
06:43 < Amnadya> kau is UI so it's fine
06:43 < mensi> ([lo {<du'u kau> <(¹ma CU¹) (¹lebna [lo {mi bolci} KU] VAU¹)> KEI} KU] VAU)
06:43 < zipcpi> Yep
06:43 < zipcpi> makfa
06:44 < zipcpi> I dunno, even though it only saves syllables when there is more than one question word, it's cleaner pe'i
06:44 < Amnadya> Cleaner only if it still turns ma into an indirect question word
06:45 < Amnadya> What if it means {lo du'u xu kau ma lebna}
06:45 < zipcpi> u'i
06:45 < Ilmen> lo zo'u fa gerku fe mlatu cu viska
06:46 < Amnadya> I just opened my Toaq Book for the first time in a year
06:46 < zipcpi> Well, there's also that other use of {kau} though... implicit predication with discursives. {ju'ocu'i makau catra la .tom.} Well, fegli su'o da, but it is used
06:46 < Ilmen> lo purmo co'a vofli
06:47 < Ilmen> co zifre
06:47 < Amnadya> It looks so pretty!
06:47 < Amnadya> zipcpi: Used by you :)
06:47 < zipcpi> u'i
06:48 < Amnadya> So the book shows these two examples: (6.) sún hi dáu moq ?
06:48 < Amnadya>  like you which animal INTERROGATIVE
06:48 < Amnadya>  „Which animals do you like?"
06:48 < zipcpi> Well the problem is IMO all predicates do have a hidden NU
06:48 < Amnadya> (7.) Sùa sún hi rái moq ?
06:48 < Amnadya>  do you which anything INTERROGATIVE
06:48 < Amnadya>  „What are you doing?"
06:48 < zipcpi> Usually it's {nu} or {du'u}
06:49  * Amnadya so proud
06:49 < zipcpi> But when talking about stuff like how Lojban words might be defined; well, technically it's {ce'u}, but {ce'u} is inconvenient if you have several variables and want to juggle them like one so often does in definitions
06:50 < Ilmen> ki'u ma no tonga sinxa cu pagbu zo'oi hi .i xu co'e zo mo'oi .enai zo do
06:50 < Amnadya> go'i
06:50 < Ilmen> ja'o zo do .implisite
06:50 < Amnadya> na go'i
06:50 < Amnadya> sún = do
06:51 < zipcpi> So with the old {xyxipa} or {fabu} styles, it is implicit {ka} *and* implicit {ce'ai}
06:51 < Ilmen> ua .i zo nelci ma zvati
06:51 < Amnadya> ua zo nelci na zvati
06:51 < Ilmen> zo nelci ma zvati .i zo nelci na zvati .i zo nelci ba zvati ĭa
06:52 < Amnadya> da'i lu  Tcò sún hi dáu moq  li'u
06:52 < zipcpi> Sounds like some cross between Cantonese and Vietnamese to me :p
06:52 < Amnadya> .i mi nu'o ro re'u jdice fi lo valsi
06:52 < zipcpi> Though I'm not sure how the tones work yet
06:53 < Ilmen> zipcpi: "q" = [ŋ]
06:53 < zipcpi> I worked with tonal languages before, but not with this many tones
06:53 < zipcpi> I know that
06:53 < Ilmen> jee
06:54 < Amnadya> http://selpahi.de/tonediagram.JPG
06:54 < Amnadya> Actually the light pink tone was removed long ago
06:56 < zipcpi> And so I don't see the problem of using {kau} in the main predicate; sure it's confusing out of context, but the UI2 generally provide sufficient context IMO
06:56 < zipcpi> Of course, I think with Toaq Dzu, UI2 won't be needed
06:56 < Amnadya> Tone# Tone Name Unicode ASCII Function
06:56 < Amnadya> 1 Even ā a- Content clause
06:56 < Amnadya> 2 Rising á a/ Argument phrase
06:56 < Amnadya> 3 Dipping ă a° Sentence relative phrase
06:56 < Amnadya> 4 Falling ả a? Preposition
06:56 < Amnadya> 5 Peaking â a^ Relative clause
06:56 < Amnadya> 6 Low à a\ Predicate
06:56 < Amnadya> 7 Creaky [Dipping] ã a~ Adverbial phrase
06:56 < Amnadya> 8 Neutral a a Function word
06:57 < Ilmen> For writting tonal languages in latin alphabet with diacritics, I'd use dotless i: "ı", so that the tone marks on "i" outstands better
06:57 < zipcpi> Cause UI2 is really just shorthand for {mi se jungau lo du'u...} {mi birti lo du'u...}, etc.
06:57 < zipcpi> Er se jungau fi lo du'u
07:00 < Ilmen> Will Toaq Dzu have something like ri'oi or lo bi'unai?
07:00 < Amnadya> No.
07:00 < Amnadya> sa'e, not as cmavo
07:00 < Ilmen> je'e
07:01 < Amnadya> It has lots of pronouns (which are predicates)
07:01 < Ilmen> Yet, mo'oi is a cmavo, there
07:01 < gleki> yay, ithkuil is now easier than toki pona
07:02 < zipcpi> What's the difference between cmavo and na'e cmavo in Toaq Dzu?
07:02 < Ilmen> maybe mo'oi could be a predicate "x1 is what has property x2"
07:02 < Amnadya> cmavo don't take tones. predicates change with each tone
07:03 < gleki> zipcpi: Ew! Eulojban.
07:03 < zipcpi> lol
07:03 < Ilmen> (x1 mintu mo'oi ckaji be x2)
07:03 < Amnadya> ithkuil: eulojban
07:03 < ithkuil> eulojban: P2S2/DYN-l-ERG-UNI/ASO/U/GRA/NRM-AGC_1/5-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
07:04 < zipcpi> Well, erm, yes, I stole selpa'i-s old anaphora system, though I made some changes to it
07:04 < Amnadya> I hope so.
07:04 < Amnadya> E.g. remove all gender stuff
07:05 < zipcpi> Well, it's still has male/female, but {reu} is just "person}
07:05 < gleki> sometimes i can get rid of kau, sometimes i can't. maybe those are different kau
07:05 < Ilmen> There's a fair amount of languages that completely lack gendered pronouns
07:05 < Ilmen> ti'e
07:05 < Amnadya> Turkish
07:05 < gleki> persian
07:05 < Ilmen> Wolof
07:05 < gleki> ~=Mandarin
07:05 < zipcpi> Well, the changes is that deu = danlu, teu = dacti jenai danlu
07:06 < zipcpi> So doesn't distinguish between plants and other inanimate objects
07:06 < Ilmen> animate/inanimate
07:06 < zipcpi> Yep
07:07 < Amnadya> ta'o sai, re: lo no'u ti etc.
07:07 < zipcpi> Also no remna case
07:07 < gleki> there should be an animcay marker denoting lightning. like in Navajo
07:07 < zipcpi> u'i
07:07 < gleki> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navajo_grammar#yi-.2Fbi-_Alternation_.28Animacy.29
07:07 < zipcpi> No remna pronoun, only prenu
07:08 < Amnadya> (Ithkuil has good pronouns)
07:08 < zipcpi> gleki: Very interesting, but I don't think we want to copy it lol
07:08 < Ilmen> Nice, so it can be as handy for non-humans, like robots etc
07:09 < Ilmen> Now you gotta add some new colors predicate so that it can be spoken by birds, and maybe mantis shrimps
07:09  * Ilmen runs
07:09 < Amnadya> I have found a solution that I will write an article about at some point, which simply involves an unrestrictive {je} (which also solves other problems).
07:09 < gleki> indeed not culturally neutral towards shrimps
07:11 < Ilmen> A solution for "lo ti broda"?
07:11 < zipcpi> Oh Eulojban does have that
07:12 < zipcpi> ti neu broda
07:12 < durka42> zipcpi: how the heck to you pronounce eu
07:12 < Amnadya> [ew]
07:12 < durka42> oi
07:15 < zipcpi> peu = po'u lo, neu = no'u lo. Basically meant to be {poi}/{noi}, but doesn't start a new bridi
07:16 < durka42> Eulojban sounds like a european version, lol
07:16 < durka42> call it Leujban
07:16 < zipcpi> lul
07:17 < zipcpi> The pun is meant to be with the Greek prefix eu-, like eupepsia
07:17 < zipcpi> eukaryote
07:17 < gleki> ew pepsi
07:17 < zipcpi> euphony
07:17 < zipcpi> lol
07:17 < durka42> but it must not be pronounced like those words, since that is {iu}
07:17 < zipcpi> Yeah... lol
07:18 < zipcpi> Well, in Classical Greek, it is [ew]
07:18 < zipcpi> Not sure about modern Greek
07:19 < Amnadya> It turned into ef
07:19 < zipcpi> Right
07:20 < Amnadya> In German it's pronounced {oi}
07:20 < Amnadya> (the diphthong "eu" in general, too)
07:21 < zipcpi> Ah
07:21  * demize is always amused when he hears German people pronounce 'euro'.
07:21 < durka42> oi
07:21 < durka42> .u'i
07:23 < gleki> oi phonia!
07:23 < zipcpi> Hah. What attitudinal should we even assign to {.eu} anyway? :p
07:23 < Amnadya> pain
07:24 < zipcpi> lol
07:24 < gleki> believe me or not but in {ganai mo gi mo} "nai" wasn't specially defined. It was just allowed as any UI in post clause. So the parser thought of {ganai} just as of {ga ui}.
07:25 < gleki> they should've just written "output = function (input){return "{"+input+"}";}
07:26 < gleki> and the parser is done
07:45 < durka42> why is that a problem
07:45 < durka42> seems elegant
07:45 < durka42> who needs another rule
07:45 < durka42> in the original camxes NAI was separate, but then it was unified with UI
07:45 < gleki> it is a problem because in connectives NAI has another meaning
07:46 < gleki> in giheks it was specified differently
07:46 < gleki> which was and is fine
07:46 < gleki> NAI isn't an attitudinal after geks
07:47 < gleki> btw i removed all "free*" from altatufa. the parser is much lighter now
07:47 < gleki> let's hope everything still works
07:47 < gleki> alta: i seimo mi mo
07:47 < mensi> ([i {sei mo SEhU}] [FA mi] [CU {mo VAU}])
07:47 < gleki> alta: i moseimo mi
07:47 < mensi> (i [FA ZOhE] [CU {mo <sei mo SEhU>} {FE mi} VAU])
07:48 < gleki> "free" now belong to INTerjections
07:48 < gleki> so no need to specofy them separately
07:48 < gleki> *specify
07:49 < gleki> interjections are specifed in post_clause of almost any construct except UI, NAI, CAI, ROhA and DAI clauses
07:50 < gleki> in the last 5 cases INTerjection rule itself deals with compound interjections
07:55 < durka42> grammars don't capture meaning
07:57 < gleki> in {genai} and {uinai} NAI has different grammar
07:58 < gleki> {uinaisai} is {ui(naisai)} whereas {genaisai} hardly makes sense but if it does then {sai} modifes the clause or {genai} as a whole.
08:00 < gleki> off: genaisai mo gi mo
08:00 < mensi> ([ge {nai sai}] [mo VAU] gi [mo VAU] VAU)
08:00 < gleki> alta: genaisai mo gi mo
08:00 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
08:00 < gleki> and this is intentional
08:00 < gleki> even if i allow {genaisai} it will be implemented differently
08:03 < zipcpi> durka42: Do you still have trouble pronouncing /eu/? lol
08:03 < durka42> zipcpi: in a meeting, haven't listened to the recording yet
08:03 < gleki> in La Alta {eu} means {e'u}
08:05 < zipcpi> Well I would probably call it {la .e'ulojban.} in regular Lojban (as regular as the Lojban that I speak is, anyway :p)
08:05 < gleki> off: mi mo na se gi'e nai mo
08:05 < mensi> ([mi CU] [mo VAU] [na se gi'e nai] [mo VAU] VAU)
08:05 < gleki> off: mi na se e do mo
08:05 < mensi> ([{mi <na se e> do} CU] [mo VAU])
08:05 < gleki> off: mi se bi'i nai do mo
08:05 < mensi> ([{mi <se bi'i nai> do} CU] [mo VAU])
08:06 < gleki> off: mi na se bi'i nai do mo
08:06 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
08:06 < gleki> clearly
08:06 < gleki> what could {mi na se bi'i nai do mo} mean?
08:06 < gleki> en: bi'inai
08:06 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
08:06 < gleki> en: bi'i
08:06 < mensi> bi'i = [BIhI] non-logical interval connective: unordered between ... and ... |>>>
08:06 < mensi> officialdata
08:08 < gleki> 16.9)  do dicra .e'a mi ca la daucac. bi'onai la gaicac. You disturb (allowed) me at 10 not-from ... to 12 You can contact me except from 10 to 12.
08:08  * gleki notice raising in CLL
08:09 < gleki> so in bi'onai {nai} works not like in {jenai}
08:10 < gleki> because it were like {je} i would understand this phrase as "You disturb me from 10 up to not 12"
08:10 < gleki> i think this behavior of {bi'o} should be changed
08:11 < gleki> maybe just {canai} can do the intended meaning
08:13 < durka42> hmm
08:13 < durka42> yeah
08:13 < durka42> nothing to do with grammar but that is pretty awkward
08:15 < gleki> write to bpfk-list then
08:15 < gleki> but it has to do with the grammar
08:15 < gleki> i noticed that when fixing connectives in altatufa
08:15 < gleki> {nase je nai} allowed
08:16 < gleki> {nase bi'o nai} not allowed
08:16 < gleki> only
08:16 < gleki> {se bi'o nai} allowed
08:16 < durka42> eh?
08:16 < durka42> so bi'o is not in JA?
08:17 < gleki> it was and is in JOI
08:17 < gleki> jek = expr:(NA_clause? SE_clause? JA_clause NAI_clause?) {return _node("jek", expr); }
08:17 < gleki> joik = expr:(SE_clause? JOI_clause NAI_clause? / interval / GAhO_clause interval GAhO_clause) {return _node("joik", expr); }
08:17 < gleki> interval = expr:(SE_clause? BIhI_clause NAI_clause?) {return _node("interval", expr); }
08:17 < durka42> ah
08:17 < durka42> so JA and JOI are not merged
08:19 < gleki> i cant find anything on {JOI nai} in CLL.
08:20 < gleki> indeed i cant
08:21 < gleki> i mean JOI_clause, not intervals
08:21 < gleki> any example of "SE_clause JOI_clause NAI_clause"?
08:25 < gleki> off: se gu'u mo gi mo
08:25 < mensi> ([{se gu'u} mo gi mo] VAU)
08:25 < gleki> off: se gu'u nai mo gi mo
08:25 < mensi> ([{se gu'u nai} mo gi mo] VAU)
08:26 < gleki> off: na se gu'u nai mo gi mo
08:26 < mensi> ([na {se gu'u nai} mo gi mo] VAU)
08:28 < gleki> Currently in {enai} {nai} has its own node called "connective right negator". This node doesnt appear for {nai} in attitudinals or sumtcita.
08:29 < gleki> ^about la altatufa
09:11  * nuzba @_Vanessa_sary_: @MatthewHuang90 @willingtheweird He wrote in Lojban, huh? Lmfaooo [http://bit.ly/1CLOu1I]
09:13  * nuzba @wyoreorm: lojban lo logji bangu    意味はわからんが転写してみた http://t.co/7ZcF8R7g1h [http://bit.ly/1GqBolw]
09:52  * nuzba @soblo_xivan: うぉれおるむさんに続いて、私も「lojban lo logji bangu」を自作文字で転写した。    Arialのようなフォントにするとこんな感じ。 http://t.co/BOfcweWXo0 [http://bit.ly/1Oc7TJQ]
09:58  * nuzba @sashimiwiki: "lojban lo logji bangu"の転写、下は筆記体 http://t.co/6kuzCUPHM7 [http://bit.ly/1MajWJ4]
10:10  * nuzba @palfem_kleet: lojbanを自言語文字で書こうは後でやる気があればやる．今はSDVX芸人タグ見たい． [http://bit.ly/1Mam3MY]
10:12 < bigcentaur> coi ro do
10:17 < zipcpi> Oh I know, I'll make eulojban brivla for what Gleki said. "the sun and the water on a swimmer's chest, the vague tremulous rose color we see with our eyes closed, the sensation of being carried along by a river and also by sleep."
10:20 < zipcpi> k: soljaunma
10:20 < mensi> (CU [Z:soljaunma VAU])
10:22 < zipcpi> k: xautkangau
10:22 < mensi> (CU [Z:xautkangau VAU])
10:23 < zipcpi> k: kangaunxe
10:23 < mensi> (CU [Z:kangaunxe VAU])
10:24 < zipcpi> k: sipnaurxe
10:24 < mensi> (CU [Z:sipnaurxe VAU])
10:25 < zipcpi> k: rirxaupna
10:25 < mensi> (CU [Z:rirxaupna VAU])
10:33 < gleki> no different from vanlamigu
10:33 < gleki> or incita
10:34 < zipcpi> I know lol
10:35 < zipcpi> k: limsauljau
10:35 < mensi> (CU [Z:limsauljau VAU])
10:35 < zipcpi> k: sipnaurxe
10:35 < mensi> (CU [Z:sipnaurxe VAU])
10:40 < gleki> what could {inai mo} mean?
10:40 < gleki> something similar to {inaku mo} although with the possibility to scale probably
10:40 < Amnadya> "ma na jetnu"
10:41 < zipcpi> k: vanlaumgu
10:41 < mensi> (CU [Z:vanlaumgu VAU])
10:41 < gleki> if allow it then {na'e i} should also be allowed
10:42 < Amnadya> na nibli .i mu'a lu ui nai li'u je nai lu na'e ui li'u
10:44 < zipcpi> eutca: x1 means whatever the speaker wants it to mean
10:45 < gleki> i'll mark {inai} as wontfix
10:46 < gleki> at least altatufa is the first parser of lojban with all ~200 instances of "free*" removed.
10:48 < zipcpi> eutceu = me'au lo eutca
10:48 < Amnadya> lol
10:59 < gleki> alta: coinai doi nai mi
10:59 < mensi> ([I {<coi nai> <doi nai>} mi DOhU] [FA ZOhE] [CU {COhE VAU}])
11:01 < gleki> that's interesting. it restored I and then put this vocative into I's post_clause.
11:38 < zipcpi> OK added my own fix to the {boi} problem to Eulojban :p
11:52  * nuzba @volxemo: lojban lo logji bangu の、自作文字転写、やってみるか← [http://bit.ly/1JnvALw]
14:01 < Amnadya> exp: -f mi viska lo cmana
14:01 < mensi> (mi [viska {lo cmana}])
14:05 < Amnadya> I've been meaning to make a brivla for the smell of rain (petrichor) for a few days now, but nothing sounds pretty enough.
14:06 < Amnadya> Neither cavypanci nor pancyrpetrikora nor petkora satisfy me yet.
14:10  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: 創作文字の転写スクリプトがなぜか lojban lo logji bangu なの、めっちゃおもろい [http://bit.ly/1LrKapR]
14:10  * nuzba @aila_sunfa: lojban lo logji bangu リプサム説 [http://bit.ly/1OkQEH5]
14:20 <@xalbo> IIRC, "petrichor" started as a portmanteau from "petra" (rock) and "ichor" (smell). I don't think that really helps, though.
14:20 < Amnadya> Rock and the "blood" of the gods
14:21 <@xalbo> I don't know how I could have forgotten that, you're right.
15:02 < Ilmen> co'o ro do
15:03 < Ilmen> .i .a'o da nu voksnu kei gi'e cabna lo bavlamdei
15:14 < ctefaho> aw crap missed ilmen
16:06 < Amnadya> Case-stacking was added to Ithkui.l "This is necessary to accurately translate sentences like the following:
16:06 < Amnadya> ‘I jog every day except in case of illness.’ or ‘I jog every day except during (an) illness.’  "
16:06 < Amnadya> A Lojbanist should immediately think of another solution
16:06 < durka42> ca ro djedi poi na jai ca bilma fai mi
16:07 < Amnadya> Exactly, or a variation thereof.
16:08 < Amnadya> durka getting all fancy
16:08 < durka42> .u'i
16:09 < durka42> mi milxe co xalbebna ca
16:09 < durka42> zo jai cu zenba lo ka co'e
16:09 < Amnadya> Clearly though you are a Lojbanist
16:09 < Amnadya> je'e .u'i
16:09 < durka42> mi jainmo
16:09 < durka42> jaizmo?
16:09 < keresth> What's the function of the {ca} at the beginning?
16:09 < Amnadya> xu pinxe lo dotco birje
16:09 < Amnadya> {ca} means "when" as in "when it rains"
16:10 < durka42> na go'i .i .ei ich essen keine getreide
16:10 < keresth> I thought it just indicated the present
16:10 < Amnadya> "at the same time as"
16:10 < Amnadya> lol durka
16:10 < Amnadya> je'e je'e
16:10 < durka42> if you don't put in a sumti it defaults to "now" but if you do then it's "at the same time as X"
16:10 < Amnadya> Lojban doesn't have tense.
16:10 < durka42> .u'i
16:11 < Amnadya> (only tense is nau)
16:12 < Amnadya> The rest are just prepositions, "before", "after", "at the same time as"
16:12 < keresth> I see.
16:12 < Amnadya> And they can be followed by "the present" / "now" / "the current moment"
16:12 < Amnadya> as well as anything else.
16:12 < Amnadya> {ca lo cabdei} - "today"
16:13 < Amnadya> {pu lo nu do sipna} - "before you sleep"
16:13 < dutchie> (insert argument about generic you here)
16:13 < dutchie> zo'o
16:27  * nuzba @slaimsan: 何故 lojban lo logji bangu が流行ったし [http://bit.ly/1SsAImw]
18:20 < bigcentaur> coi
18:23 < bigcentaur> .i xu su'o da poi jundi
20:22 < zipcpi> Hey {eutca} might actually be useful. I just added a note observing that {zo prenu cu eutca} :p
20:23 < zipcpi> We might want to give it a standard Lojban variant lol
20:23 < zipcpi> {eutceu}, however... lol
20:28 < zipcpi> {limseuljau} looks like a Korean name lol
20:37 < zipcpi> I mainly invented Eulojban because I kept thinking that "We might have a proper categorical pronoun set if only we had more short cmavo space"
20:37 < zipcpi> And "How I wish /eu/ was a valid diphthong so that can fit"... so, yeah, thought I'd just commit it down on the wiki
20:39 < zipcpi> The {po'u lo} and {no'u lo} thing pushed it over the edge
20:53 < zipcpi> OK I entered {eutca} as {autca} :p
21:42 < zipcpi> mensi: doi xalbo Nah if I added another vowel to the Eulojban class it would probably be /œ/ (assigned to w) instead of /æ/. {la .eulwjbaq.}. mi ja'a kusru lo'e se glibau
21:42 < mensi> zipcpi: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.xalbo.gy. di'a cusku da
21:46 < zipcpi> mensi: doi xalbo And hey why not make /wu/ a valid diphthong while we're at it (it sounds like an exaggerated British "oh!")
21:46 < mensi> zipcpi: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.xalbo.gy. di'a cusku da
23:27 < gleki> what was the "manskapi dilemma for NSN"?
23:30 < zipcpi> qeqxreunmrwnmlwu : = x1 is the feeling of bafflement and confusion that English speaker x2 feels when encountering strange new phonemes or usage of phonemes in non-English ways (e.g. syllable-initial q)
23:31 < zipcpi> k: nenxreunmranmlau
23:31 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "n" found.
23:31 < zipcpi> Er
23:31 < zipcpi> Oh left in an /eu/
23:31 < gleki> itkuiile ga'a mi
23:31 < zipcpi> k: nenxraunmranmlau
23:31 < mensi> (CU [Z:nenxraunmranmlau VAU])
23:31 < zipcpi> u'i doi gleki
23:58 < gleki> the basic text/text-1/paragraphs/paragraph/statement/sentence structure is completely mindbreaking
23:58 < gleki> i think i will have to reimplement it with NIhO nodes restored
--- Day changed Sat Jul 18 2015
00:28 < gleki> off: na'e gu'e mo gi mo
00:28 < mensi> ([na'e gu'e mo gi mo] VAU)
01:02 < cliva> spagetufa: la cmev cu ia ai broda lo uanmo vau ui
01:02 < spagetufa> ([FA {la .cmev. KU}] [{cu <ĭa .ai>} {bròda <(¹FE [lo ŭànmo KU]¹) (¹vau. ŭi¹)>}])
01:28 < cliva> xu da'i va'o lo nu lo'u .i bai ke le'u co'a gendra kei da pante
01:28 < cliva> fa poi na ta'e pante ro da
01:29 < cliva> side
01:31 < cliva> y ju'i nai .i na sai kompatible
01:31 < cliva> .i da'i lo'u ke .i bai bo le'u
01:33  * nuzba @koridentetsu: ヒッタン語にしても千織語にしても、音節末尾に j が立つことや、jb という子音連続を容認しないので、「ロジバン lojban」という名称を表す方法は、母音を補って lojiban とするのが最適だろうか。 [http://bit.ly/1J6Agd9]
01:43  * nuzba @harmat_noln: lojban lo logji bangu. http://t.co/DwxR2WSUuB [http://bit.ly/1fcRU2x]
01:49  * nuzba @harmat_noln: lojban lo logji bangu.    (若葉文字) http://t.co/x7ZiZdNjE4 [http://bit.ly/1J6Bfdh]
01:55  * nuzba @harmat_noln: lojban lo logji bangu.    (パラオヌイヤ文字) http://t.co/F4lCfHLDs6 [http://bit.ly/1J6BF3r]
02:45  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: 一応みんなやってるから、.lojban. lo logji bangu を凛花で http://t.co/oknjqEjmM4 [http://bit.ly/1StsnPv]
03:02 < zipcpi> Hey I wonder if...
03:02 < zipcpi> vlaste: bemza (gimka)
03:02 < vlaste> zo bemza gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo bemza gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
03:03 < zipcpi> vlaste: famza (gimka)
03:03 < vlaste> zo famza gimkamsmikezypro zo fanza noi catni gismu .i zo famza gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
03:03 < zipcpi> vlaste: dumza (gimka)
03:03 < vlaste> zo dumza gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo dumza gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
03:03 < zipcpi> vlaste: nemzu (gimka)
03:03 < vlaste> zo nemzu gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo nemzu gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
03:03 < zipcpi> vlaste: vumza (gimka)
03:03 < vlaste> zo vumza gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo vumza gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
03:04 < zipcpi> Yay
03:04 < zipcpi> lol
03:04 < zipcpi> New gismu for Eulojban
03:10 < gleki> i no longer think that {ni'o TAG bo} makes sense. but {ni'o [I] TAG bo} with I autorestored can make sense
03:21 < gleki> alta: +s mi mo
03:21 < mensi> (NIhO_elided [I:I {FA KOhA:mi} {CU <GOhA:mo VAU>}])
04:09  * nuzba @nilab: 「ロジバン ( lojban [loʒban] ) は、ログランを元に、さらなる機能性を追求して LLG が開発を引率してきた人工言語である。1987年に公表され、1997年に文法が暫定的に完成」        ロジバン - Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%AD%E3%82%B8%E3%83%90%E3%83%B3 [http://bit.ly/1LtnYM2]
05:08 < gleki> alta: ni'o babo mi viska lo cnino gentufa ije ri jai pluka mi i ku'i lo badna cu kukte zmadu
05:08 < mensi> (ni'o [I bridi_elided {I <ba bo> <FA mi> <CU (¹viska NF¹) (¹FE [lo {cnino <gentufa NF>} KU]¹) VAU>} {i je <FA ri> <CU (¹jai [pluka NF]¹) (¹FE mi¹) VAU>}] [i ku'i] [FA {lo <badna NF> KU}] [cu
05:08 < mensi>  {kukte <zmadu NF>} VAU])
05:28  * nuzba @GlekiArxokuna: My @Quora answer to Why doesn't Lojban use the letter H instead of '? http://qr.ae/R8cq6h [http://bit.ly/1Gskymh]
05:30  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
05:33 < zipcpi> coi Ilmen
05:33 < zipcpi> mi na kakne lo ka jorne
05:34 < zipcpi> ri'a da poi mi na djuno tau ki
05:36 < cliva> zipcpi: rinka fa sa'e nai lo nu mi lazni .i ko pilno ju'oi zbagazasni.ax.lt
05:36  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa gunro fa
05:37  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa zipcpi fa
05:38  * nuzba @GlekiArxokuna: My @Quora answer to What are the main differences between natural languages and Lojban? http://qr.ae/R8SAfi [http://bit.ly/1LhAOhO]
05:39 < gleki> The most important differences that immediately come to mind are:
05:39 < gleki> 1. In Lojban people start to understand more where metaphors start in their speech. Metaphors are important in our speech but sometimes they can lead us to incorrect reasoning. It's nice that in Lojban you can both use and avoid metaphors when you like.
05:39 < gleki> 2. In Lojban punctuation like e.g. quote marks is pronounceable. Thus, it's easy to know when a quote starts and ends even in colloquial speech.
05:39 < gleki> 3. For me Lojban is like a bridge between programming languages, speakable languages and knowledge representation languages. In no way Lojban can replace all of them just like a bridge between two continents can't replace the continents themselves.
05:40 < zipcpi> Yeah I read it
05:40 < zipcpi> Very interesting answer
05:40 < gleki> one more answer from someone else: For one, many non-native speakers of natural languages can converse easily and spontaneously about everyday matters. From what I've seen and heard of, Lojbanists spend a lot of time hesitating and pondering the exact logical form they want to express.
05:42  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: 例としてシダさんの俳句をば        https://twitter.com/s_i_d_a/status/621778787722657792 http://t.co/JFULir2orm [http://bit.ly/1LhBkMN]
05:43 < gleki> Ilmen: ma judri lo voksa kumfa
05:44 < zipcpi> zo'oi zbagazasni.ax.lt
05:44  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
05:44  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa akti fa
05:45 < Ilmen> 84.73.73.130
05:45 < Ilmen> Port 64738
05:45  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa akti fa
05:46  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa akti fa
05:48  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
05:57  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
06:23  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa taldar fa
06:26  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa akti fa
06:45  * nuzba @Vanege_EO: Mi ne scias kion #TokiPona faros al mia cerbo, do eble mi devus provi (denove) lerni #Lojban samtempe ^-^" [http://bit.ly/1CNX8Nj]
06:46 < gleki> alta: je mo
06:46 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA ZOhE> <CU COhE>} {I je <FA ZOhE> <CU (¹mo VAU¹)>}])
06:47 < gleki> text/paragraph/statement section almost completely fixed
06:47 < gleki> alta: ni'obabo mo
06:47 < mensi> (ni'o [I {<FA ZOhE> <CU COhE>} {I <ba bo> <FA ZOhE> <CU (¹mo VAU¹)>}])
06:48 < gleki> not sure if this is what selpa'i meant
06:55 < gleki> alta: bo mo
06:55 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA ZOhE> <CU COhE>} {I <DOhE bo> <FA ZOhE> <CU (¹mo VAU¹)>}])
06:55 < gleki> ^ {ibo} restored into {ido'ebo}
06:58 < cliva> alta: broda ibobrode inajabrodi
06:58 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA ZOhE> <CU (¹broda NF¹) VAU>} {i <DOhE bo> <(¹FA ZOhE¹) (¹CU [brode NF] VAU¹)> <i (¹na ja¹) (¹FA ZOhE¹) (¹CU [brodi NF] VAU¹)>}])
07:00 < gleki> lu inaja  li'u gerna dunli lu ije li'u
07:00 < cliva> lo nu jajgau cu simlu lo ka cizra
07:01 < cliva> exp: broda ibobrode inajabrodi
07:01 < mensi> ([{CU <broda VAU>} {i bo <CU (¹brode VAU¹)>}] [i {na ja} {CU <brodi VAU>}])
07:01 < gleki> xu do te smuni lo nu lo cimoi jufra na lasna lo remoi jufra
07:01 < gleki> exp: broda ido'ebobrode inajabrodi
07:01 < mensi> ([{CU <broda VAU>} {i do'e bo <CU (¹brode VAU¹)>}] [i {na ja} {CU <brodi VAU>}])
07:02 < gleki> uanai ki'u ma
07:03 < cliva> zo bo ro roi jai rinka lo diklo nu lasna
07:03 < gleki> exp: broda ido'ebobrode ido'ebobrodi
07:03 < mensi> ([CU {broda VAU}] [i do'e bo {CU <brode VAU>} {i do'e bo <CU (¹brodi VAU¹)>}])
07:04 < gleki> i faulonu mi djica lo ka pilno lu do'e li'u enai lu do'e bo li'u gi'e na jai gau lasna fai lo remoi lo cimoi vau mi zukte ma
07:05 < gleki> [(i mo) (ido'ebo mo) ] (i do'e bo mo)
07:05 < gleki> se djica mi
07:05 < cliva> mi zukpei lo ka jai gau curmi fai tu'a lo'u broda ke .i do'e bo brode [KEhE] le'u
07:05 < cliva> ja lo simsa
07:07 < gleki> ma'i lo catni zo bo jai bapli lo nu lo'u do'e bo le'u co'a diklo lasna i ku'i ma'i lo catni lo ma'oi joi e ma'oi ja terjonma'o cu vlipa zmadu i ja'o na kulnu zo'o nutli co me lo'u do'e bo le'u 
07:07 < cliva> ue ru'e xu ja'ai
07:08 < cliva> yacc: broda .i do'e bo brode .i je brodi
07:08 < mensi> ({<broda VAU> <i do'e bo> <brode VAU>} {i je} {brodi VAU})
07:09 < gleki> yacc: broda .i do'e bo brode .i do'ebo brodi
07:09 < mensi> ({broda VAU} {i do'e bo} {<brode VAU> <i do'e bo> <brodi VAU>})
07:09 < gleki> ja'a si'au
07:09 < gleki> gerna: mi e tu e do mo
07:09 < mensi> (0[{<mi e tu> e do} CU {mo VAU}])0
07:09 < gleki> gerna: mi e tu ebo do mo
07:09 < mensi> (0[{mi e <tu (1e bo)1 do>} CU {mo VAU}])0
07:09 < cliva> simlu co mleca co vlipa
07:10 < gleki> gerna: mi e tu edo'ebo do mo
07:10 < mensi> (0[{mi e <tu (1e do'e bo)1 do>} CU {mo VAU}])0
07:10 < gleki> mi djica tu'a zoi .gern. (0[{<mi e tu> edo'ebo do} CU {mo VAU}])0 .gern.
07:10 < cliva> .i ku'i mi ro roi simvukna lo simsa[D be zo vlipa
07:11 < cliva> gerna: mi e tu edo'eke do
07:11 < mensi> (0[{<mi e tu> <e do'e> <ke do KE'E>} VAU])0
07:11 < gleki> ue
07:11 < gleki> gerna: mi e tu edo'bo eke do
07:11 < mensi> O_0
07:12 < gleki> gerna: mi e tu edo'ebo ke do
07:12 < mensi> O_0
07:12 < gleki> gerna: mi mo i do'e ke mi mo
07:12 < mensi> O_0
07:12 < gleki> i mabla
07:12 < cliva> je'u
07:12 < gleki> gerna: mi mo i do'e tu'e mi mo
07:12 < mensi> (0[{mi CU <mo VAU>} i {do'e tu'e <mi CU (1mo VAU)1> TU'U}])0
07:13 < gleki> oi
07:13 < cliva> ... ua
07:13 < gleki> i na se djica mi
07:13 < gleki> i nasai lasna
07:13 < gleki> fa lo remoi
07:13 < cliva> .i mi kucli lo du'u ma kau se kosmu ga'a lo banfi'i
07:14 < cliva> .i ka'e ku lu do'e zo'u tu'e li'u ka'e smufrica lu do'e tu'e li'u
07:16 < gleki> gerna: mi mo i do'e zo'u tu'e mi mo
07:16 < mensi> (0[{mi CU <mo VAU>} i {<(1do'e KU)1 zo'u> <tu'e (1mi CU [mo VAU])1 TU'U>}])0
07:16 < gleki> lo'u ije le'u jau gau lasna zu'ai fa lo re jufra
07:16 < gleki> i ku'i lo'u ido'e zo'u le'u na kakne
07:16 < cliva> ie
07:16 < gleki> i ja'o mi ganse no nu slilu fa le nu vlipa doi padavan
07:17 < cliva> .u'i
07:17 < gleki> ikrinu lo nu mi finti lo se finti
07:18  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa zipcpi fa
07:19  * nuzba @qothr: 現行のクレリカ文字で    lojban lo logji bangu http://t.co/TXYvaCU1Jm [http://bit.ly/1StI2hV]
07:21 < gleki> la'a ei mi mrilu fi lo BPFK mriste
07:21 < gleki> fe la'e di'u
07:22 < gleki> gerna: mi mo ije do'e zo'u mi mo
07:22 < mensi> O_0
07:22 < gleki> uanai
07:22 < gleki> i ua
07:22 < gleki> gerna: mi mo i do'e zo'u mi mo
07:22 < mensi> (0[{mi CU <mo VAU>} i {<(1do'e KU)1 zo'u> <mi CU (1mo VAU)1>}])0
07:22 < gleki> cizra je ci'izra
07:22 < Ilmen> gerna: mo .i je ti zo'u mo
07:22 < mensi> O_0
07:23 < _mukti_> .i pe'i bu'o lo mriste pe byfy cu binxo lo cnino jboske ki'u lo nu byfy na zukte
07:23 < gleki> off: mo ije ti zo'u mo
07:23 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
07:23 < Ilmen> ĭa na nelci lo nu lo prenexo cu se la'erli'e lu ije li'u
07:23 < mensi> i ji'a mi na nelci mi'e la mensi
07:23 < gleki> ie ie
07:23 < Ilmen> gerna: ge mo gi ti zo'u mo
07:23 < mensi> (0[ge {mo VAU} gi {<ti zo'u> <mo VAU>} VAU])0
07:23 < Ilmen> ŭe ti ku'i gendra
07:23 < Ilmen> .i ku'i .e'i jezdu'i
07:24 < gleki> _mukti_: mi nitcu lo me'oi postgres vreji pe JVS datni sorcu i xu do ka'e benji fi mi
07:24 < _mukti_> gleki: ie .i mi xenru lo nu na spuda
07:24 < Ilmen> sa'e .e'i jetydu'i
07:25 < _mukti_> .i .ai mi fi do benji
07:27 < gleki> mudri: fau lo nu no drata co'a zukte vau mi ba e'idji lo ka si'unai favgau lo cnino jbovlaste  i ku'i mi na djica lo ka galfi lo nau datni sorcu formata i su'a mi na djica lo ka junri jbozu'e vau ju'inai ru'e
07:27 < gleki> oi
07:27 < gleki> mudri: u'u ju'inai
07:27 < gleki> _mukti_: fau lo nu no drata co'a zukte vau mi ba e'idji lo ka si'unai favgau lo cnino jbovlaste  i ku'i mi na djica lo ka galfi lo nau datni sorcu formata i su'a mi na djica lo ka junri jbozu'e vau ju'inai ru'e
07:28 < mudri> krefu .u'i
07:30 < _mukti_> .i ua mi gleki lo nu do gunka lo cnino jbovlaste .i vajni fa lo nu basti lo tolci'o
07:32  * nuzba @fotono: #lojban zantufa tricu http://guskant.github.io/gerna_cipra/zantufa_farvi.svg i cnino mekso http://mw.lojban.org/papri/zantufa_mekso i ma'oi FA ka'e selbrisle tcita http://mw.lojban.org/papri/zantufa_ze%27oi_FA [http://bit.ly/1StJDUV]
07:32 < gleki> _mukti_: mi nu'o gunka i ku'i fau da'i lo nu no drata cu co'e vau mi co'e
07:33 < gleki> i ei ma'a pilno lo cmavo be zo pu vau u'i
07:34 < gleki> exp: fa joi fe mi'o penmi
07:34 < mensi> ([{fa <joi fe>} mi'o] [CU {penmi VAU}])
07:35 < _mukti_> ti'e la tsani cu gunka lo cnino jbovlaste .i ru'a na jetnu
07:35 < gleki> i la zantufa cu po'o genturfa'i je cu stidi no smuni
07:35 < gleki> i ku'i ra noi mupli cu ka'e se smuni lo du'u
07:35 < gleki> do joi mi simxu lo ka ce'u ce'u penmi lo barja
07:35 < gleki> i di'u se cusku la guskant
07:36 < gleki> i eipei ma'a tugni
07:38 < _mukti_> .i ue xu lo gunma cu sevzi penmi
07:39 < gleki> la'a zo joi pe la guskant cu du zo ce pe CLL
07:39 < _mukti_> ua
07:39 < gleki> i ku'i mi na tugni
07:39 < gleki> i zo joi pe lo gunma cu plixau
07:40 < _mukti_> .i ku'i xu lo selcmi cu ka'e sevzi penmi
07:40 < gleki> i ku'i mi retsku lo smuni frica
07:40 < gleki> i ie
07:40 < gleki> i la guskant cu xusra lo srana be lo nu simxu
07:40 < cliva> zantufa: by su'i cy mo
07:40 < zantufa> ([{<by BOI> <su'i (¹cy BOI¹)>} mo KU] VAU)
07:40 < cliva> exp: by su'i cy mo
07:40 < mensi> ([{by BOI} {su'i <cy BOI>}] [CU {mo VAU}])
07:42 < cliva> zantufa: li pa ja re
07:42 < zantufa> ([li {<pa BOI> <ja (¹re BOI¹)>} LOhO] VAU)
07:42 < cliva> zantufa: by ja cy mo
07:42 < zantufa> ([{by BOI} {ja <cy BOI>}] CU [mo VAU])
07:43 < _mukti_> So this is curious. I see the idea that a ce-set can be decomposed with simxu is in "Lojban for Beginners"
07:44 < _mukti_> I haven't gamed it out, but it seems to me that if a singularizer can be unpacked like that, you have ambiguity if there's more than one singularizer.
07:45 < _mukti_> lo gunma jonai selcmi be lo sonci cu simxu lo ka ce'u damba ce'u
07:45 < _mukti_> lo re gunma jonai selcmi be lo sonci cu simxu lo ka ce'u damba ce'u
07:55 < omni___> c o i
07:56 < omni___> ｃｏｉ
07:59 < omni___> ．ｉ ｄｏ ｍｏ
08:00 < _mukti_> coi la omni
08:00 < omni___> ｃｏｉ ｌａ ｍｕｋｔｉ
08:00 < _mukti_> za'a do mutce lo ka ce canlu
08:01 < _mukti_> s/ce/se/
08:01 < fenki> _mukti_ meant to say: za'a do mutse lo ka ce canlu
08:01 < _mukti_> ?
08:01 < _mukti_> za'a do mutce lo ka se canlu
08:02 < omni___> uhi
08:02 < omni___> ｕｈｉ
08:02 < omni___> ｊｕｈｉ ｎａｉ
08:02 < _mukti_> ue ju'i bu'o
08:04 < omni___> _mukti_: What would you think if someone was writing a novel in Lojban?
08:05 < _mukti_> I'd be glad to hear of it. I'm starting to think that energetic applications of lojban are as important for its future as the more formal projects, like revising CLL.
08:05 < omni___> .i da'i do ma jinvi lo nu su da finti lo cfika be bau lo jbobau
08:06 < omni___> je'e
08:07 < _mukti_> I'm finally making good on the intention that I've had for a long time to read all of «lo se manci te makfa pe la .oz.», and struck by how many lessons are packed into it ... ideas that haven't yet been captured in discussions ABOUT lojban.
08:08 < omni___> That's why I tell everyone to read la .alis.
08:08 < omni___> I doubt many actually follow that advice though
08:08 < _mukti_> I'll have to read that next.
08:09 < _mukti_> I had some misgivings about .alis. since it is, at least by reputation, a community translation. I know xorxes led the way, however, so perhaps he provided a steady hand?
08:10 < omni___> There are two versions. One was a community translations (although xorxes did most of the work) and the other is all xorxes's (although he said that pierre did one or two chapters)
08:10 < _mukti_> Oh!
08:11 < omni___> xorxes' version is gold.
08:12 < _mukti_> ua sai .i .ai mi tcidu
08:12 < omni___> :)
08:13 < _mukti_> .i mi ji'a co'a finti .i ku'i ga'i nai mi finti lo cmalu cukta .i srana lo cinmo cmavo
08:14 < omni___> ua  .i'e finti
08:18 < _mukti_> http://vrici.lojban.org/~mukti/ahi.jpg
08:18 < omni___> ue
08:32 < Ilmen> coi
08:32 < _mukti_> coi la .ilmen.
08:33 < Ilmen> coi la mukti .i mukti ma ca lo cabdei
08:33 < Ilmen> .i pu za lo cacra cu voksnu ta'o
08:34 < _mukti_> .i mi pu'o cliva lo zdani te zu'e tu'a lo cersai
08:35 < Ilmen> je'e .i .a'o kukte
08:36 < _mukti_> .i'o
08:44 < gleki> i only translated the preface of Alice putting it into a rhymed poem
08:44 < gleki> zantufa: mi mo ije mo ije mo
08:44 < zantufa> ([mi CU {mo VAU}] [i je {CU <mo VAU>}] [i je {CU <mo VAU>}])
08:44 < gleki> exp: mi mo ije mo ije mo
08:44 < mensi> ([mi {CU <mo VAU>}] [i je {CU <mo VAU>}] [i je {CU <mo VAU>}])
08:54 < _mukti_> ue
08:55 < _mukti_> camxes: .i cu broda
08:55 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
08:55 < _mukti_> I didn't realized that {cu} was forbidden in that position. Silly.
09:07 < Reid_> coi mi cnino la lojban.
09:07 < Ilmen> coi
09:07 < Ilmen> mi slabu la .lojban.
09:08 < Reid_> au mi ji'a go'i
09:08 < Ilmen> za'a do xa'o certu
09:08 < Ilmen> .i ma bangu do
09:09 < Reid_> la gliban
09:09 < Ilmen> je'e .i mi ji'a se bangu lo glibau ku po'onai
09:10 < Ilmen> .i xu do cilre fo la xunre cukta
09:10 < Ilmen> ku no'u CLL
09:10 < Ilmen> pau
09:11 < Reid_> cilre fo zo'e pe lu la lojban. mo li'u
09:11 < Ilmen> je'e
09:12 < Reid_> sa
09:12 < Reid_> mi cfipu tu'a le cmene
09:12 < Ilmen> .i ca lo nu mi co'a cilre kei mi ji'a pilno la'e lu la .lojban. mo li'u
09:12 < Ilmen> .i do ba'e se cfipu
09:12 < Reid_> la'o gy. Lojban for Beginners gy
09:12 < Ilmen> ŭa
09:12 < Ilmen> je'e
09:12 < Ilmen> .i mi no roi tcidu .i ku'i lo cmene cu slabu
09:13 < Ilmen> (I've never read it; but I know it by its name)
09:13 < Reid_> .ua
09:14 < Ilmen> .i ra'u pu ku mi pilno la boxna ve cilre fi lo ka cilre
09:14 < gleki> do se slabu la lojban i ku'i ji'a je'u do ba'e slabu la lojban to ri se irci toi
09:14 < Ilmen> (I've mainly used the Wave Lessons for learning)
09:14 < Reid_> je'e
09:15 < Ilmen> .i xu la boxna ve cilre do slabu
09:15 < Ilmen> (Do you know of the Wave Lessons?)
09:15 < Reid_> mi pu na snada lonu facki lo se cmene be la boxna ve cilre
09:16 < Ilmen> .i .ai mi judri dunda
09:16 < Reid_> ca mi snada sepi'o le glico cmene
09:16 < Ilmen> http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=Lojban_Wave_Lessons
09:16 < Reid_> ca ku
09:16 < Ilmen> .u'a dai
09:16 < Ilmen> pe'i do ca certu tavla
09:17 < Ilmen> .i ca ma do co'a cilre
09:17 < Reid_> lenu zbasu lo jufra kei cu temci barda
09:18 < Ilmen> By the way, "ca mi" is wrong, it means "at the same time as me / my existence"
09:18 < Reid_> .i puza ji'i pa masti
09:18 < Ilmen> You wanted "ca ku mi..."
09:18 < Reid_> .ua
09:18 < Ilmen> pu za lo masti be li ji'i pa
09:18 < Reid_> I realized that after I said it
09:18 < Ilmen> je'e
09:19 < Ilmen> mi zo'u pu za lo nanca be li ji'i ci co'a cilre
09:19 < Ilmen> (As for me, I've begun to learn about 3 years ago)
09:20 < Reid_> xu do ganse lonu le pensi tadji cu cenba
09:20 < gleki> *you began
09:20 < gleki> :P
09:21 < Ilmen> nandu preti
09:21 < Ilmen> ki'e la gleki
09:21 < Ilmen> .i mi pu cuxpei
09:21 < Ilmen> gi'e cuxna lo to'e mapti
09:22 < gleki> y
09:22 < gleki> ije'u frica smuni
09:22 < gleki> i la'cu'i do pu cuxna lo mapti
09:22 < gleki> Scientists have discovered medicines for many diseases this century
09:22 < gleki> i ku'i
09:22 < gleki> Scientists discovered medicines for many diseases in the 19th century
09:22 < Ilmen> lo nu glare cu fanta lo nu mi pensi .u'i
09:22 < Ilmen> .i .ai mi di'a citka
09:23 < Ilmen> (I'll go back eating)
09:23 < Reid_> u'i je'e
09:23 < Ilmen> doi la'oi Reid_   lo nu jbobau cilre cu pluka .a'o do
09:23 < Ilmen> (I hope you'll enjoy learning Lojban!)
09:23 < Ilmen> co'o
09:23 < Reid_> .a'o
09:23 < Reid_> co'o
09:52 < akmnlrse> top
09:52 < akmnlrse> si
09:57 < akmnlrse> .i .e'u lo bavla'i poi nu voksnu zo'u di'a pilno la jinme ke bunre kerfa
10:00  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
10:02 < omni___> xagmau fi ma
10:03 < akmnlrse> fi lo ka (to ru'a toi) na xoi suksa co'u .akti
10:03 < omni___> ua
10:04 < omni___> .i mi ja'e lo nu na zgana cu du'e roi jundi lo drata ja cu zvati lo drata
10:04  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
10:05 < akmnlrse> ku'i no drata be pa nu lo selfu xoi mentu li 10 cu spofu cu fasnu .i va'i pu lo nu spofu mo'u casnu
10:07  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa gunro fa
10:08 < omni___> pei bau la logbanu ra'oi -ka sinxa lo zilkai .i xendyka .i va'i kamxendo
10:08 < akmnlrse> mi nelci .i ra'u lo jvaprefixi cu milxe lo ka mabla
10:10 < akmnlrse> s/no drata be pa nu lo selfu xoi mentu li 10 cu spofu cu fasnu/pa nu co'e li'o cu ro mei lo fasnu/
10:10 < fenki> akmnlrse meant to say: ku'i pa nu co'e li'o cu ro mei lo fasnu .i va'i pu lo nu spofu mo'u casnu
10:10 < akmnlrse> .oi
10:11 < Ilmen> ĭe go'oi bunre
10:11 < omni___> ta'o ba'e do ma stidi da'i ra'a lu lo citno ba'o zei jatna li'u
10:12 < omni___> .i mi na se mansa lu lo citno jatna be ba'o li'u .i fegli
10:12 < akmnlrse> mansa mi
10:13 < omni___> .i je li'a lu lo citno ba'o jatna li'u zo'u na tanru (to doi na se slabu be lo se casnu toi)
10:13 < akmnlrse> citno ke be ba'o jatna sei feglymau
10:13 < omni___> .i lu be ba'o li'u zo'u na panra lo stura be lo na se pagbu be zo citno moi
10:14 < omni___> .i su'a ma brivla panra lo tense ja aspekte su'i lo brivla
10:14 < gleki> oi la selpahi cu djica lo nu la itkuiile na ambigu i ku'i na lojbau
10:15 < omni___> s/be lo na/be lo me lo na
10:15 < fenki> omni___ meant to say: .i lu be ba'o li'u zo'u na panra lo stura be lo me lo na se pagbu be zo citno moi
10:16 < omni___> guzmyrmelona
10:16 < akmnlrse> za'a la xorxo cu skicu zo ba'o se pi'o zo mulcabna
10:17 < akmnlrse> .i jai mulcabna jatna sei clani
10:17 < omni___> .i lo ka .ambigu na sarxe la .itku'ile .i JQ pu finti 24 karbi genrkasu ba'e su'i lo so'i srana sufyfikse te zu'e lo nu .ambigu no da (to mupli toi)
10:18 < omni___> .i ku'i do'e su drata pagbu be lo bangu cu sa'u na se vajni xu
10:18 < phma> kurbita
10:19 < gleki> tcilokoiotli
10:19 < phma> ki'a
10:19 < omni___> akmnlrse: ie .i ku'i .i'e pei sarcu da'i fa lo nu gau basti lo sumtcita va'o ro nu tanru djica
10:20 < gleki> phma: lo me'oi pumpkin
10:20 < akmnlrse> li'a na melbi
10:20 < omni___> .i citno ba'e ke mulcabna jatna sei fegli
10:21 < akmnlrse> da'i ka'e pilno zo voi
10:21 < omni___> citno voi ba'o jatna
10:21 < omni___> .i feglyme'a ie
10:21 < omni___> .i za'a zo voi danfu ro da
10:22 < akmnlrse> ta'o zo su'i pe ru noi jufra cu frica fi ma fe zo jo'u
10:22 < omni___> na birti .i jijnu pilno mu'i tu'a lo si'o gunma
10:22 < omni___> .i la'a na vajni
10:22 < akmnlrse> je'e
10:25 < omni___> ui lo cnino me zo zei zo'u mi zifre lo ka cusku lu noi zei je li'u pu lo nu lo panra cu zasti
10:29 < gleki> ga'a mi la lojban co'a itkuiile
10:49  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa ctefaho fa
11:03  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: lojbanのwikipediaのlojbanの記事、結構頑張ってるな    https://jbo.wikipedia.org/wiki/lojban. [http://bit.ly/1MhBR1r]
12:52 < akmnlrse> omni___: sei kucli zo'u xu zo tu'a ne la zifre ze'e ba dunli lo'u tu'a lo menli si tu'a lo menli le'u lo ka nonseljmi
13:14  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa gunro fa
13:31  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa taldar fa
13:47  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa Ilmen fa
15:18 < omni___> di'a jundi
15:25 < omni___> akmnlrse: lo jai tai retsku zo'u ge'e ni'o no da prane
15:27 < omni___> .i mi lo ka mo kau cu zifre
19:24  * nuzba @slaimsan: mi tavla cei broda la .lojban .i go'i lo banjupunu [http://bit.ly/1KdQKPg]
19:53 < Roflknife34> coi ro
19:54 < phma> coi do
22:18  * nuzba @bobpoekert: @profanegeometry lojban [http://bit.ly/1GtolQ7]
--- Day changed Sun Jul 19 2015
01:35 < rlpowell> gleki: Just for the record: < gleki> Why the first line of every paragraph is indented. -- becaus ethat's how books *work* in English?
01:39 < rlpowell> See for example http://practicaltypography.com/first-line-indents.html , and http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/8941/is-an-indentation-needed-for-a-new-paragraph ; the book is already too long to have spaces between paragraphs.
01:41 < rlpowell> Which doesn't mean that you don't have some good points about indentation, I'm just answering that one question.
01:41 < rlpowell> afk.
01:54 < gleki> rlpowell: yes, ofc. it's just that the result is ugly.
02:18 < rlpowell> gleki: OK.  It's not your first language, and I've *no idea* what the typographical conventions are in ... Russian? ... so I thought I'd be clear.  :)
02:18 < gleki> rlpowell: it's not about the first line itself but in when it's used together with examples. see full issue
02:18 < rlpowell> I stared at it for a while, though, and I think I agree that it's ugly WRT examples.
02:18 < rlpowell> I have some ideas; will try them out maybe tomorrow.
02:19 < gleki> so maybe make the indentation less
02:19 < gleki> and/or increase it for examples
03:43  * nuzba @_Vanessa_sary_: @willingtheweird Huh... Lojban is hard [http://bit.ly/1DomMmz]
03:53  * niek looks att that Twitter conversation.
03:53 < niek> o_O
04:32 < gleki> But for some easy silliness I can accept javascript. Like we do for postprocessing
04:32 < gleki> alta: lo vanci co ca mi citka
04:32 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<ca (¹lo [vanci NF] KU¹)> <FA mi>} {CU <citka NF> VAU}])
04:33 < gleki> restored back to {ca lo vanci} using javascript
04:33 < gleki> but for e.g. {ni'o i} restorations i would do and actually did in peg
05:09 < zipcpi> "As for {seu} it should be written as {se .u} (two words) although to JVS it will probably get as {se u} without the dot."
05:09 < zipcpi> oi
05:09 < zipcpi> CLL stole an Eulojban word :p
05:10  * zipcpi tries entering {seu} to JVS
05:10 < zipcpi> Nope.
05:14 < zipcpi> vlaste: xismu (gimka)
05:14 < vlaste> zo xismu gimkamsmikezypro zo gismu noi catni gismu .i zo xismu gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
05:14 < zipcpi> x clashes with g? Didn't know that
05:15 < zipcpi> vlaste: brudi (gimka)
05:15 < vlaste> zo brudi gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo brudi gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
05:15 < zipcpi> ... This one doesn't clash, but how was it used?
05:15 < zipcpi> vlaste: broda (gimka)
05:15 < vlaste> zo broda gimkamsmikezypro zo brode je zo brodi je zo brodo je zo brodu vu'o noi catni gismu .i zo broda gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
05:15 < zipcpi> lol
05:22 < gleki> those are pseudo-gismu
05:22 < gleki> <cll>as an extreme example, “bradi”, “bredi”, “bridi”, and “brodi” (but fortunately not “brudi”) are all existing gismu.
05:22 < zipcpi> OK
05:24 < gleki> i started incorporating some features from zantufa.
05:24 < gleki> it's hard.
05:25 < gleki> the same language, the same source, but the rules are very different now
05:25 < gleki> and i havent yet looked at spagetufa
05:25 < zipcpi> Yeah...
05:26 < zipcpi> spagetufa has relyle'urafsi; that doesn't change previous grammar though. Not sure what features of it does
05:28 < zipcpi> Ah crap... Curtis broke {i'au} T.T
05:30 < zipcpi> There is sort of a problem with {po'o} and {ji'a}
05:30 < gleki> that they are not UI?
05:31 < zipcpi> In that UI grammar might not be so convenient for it
05:31 < zipcpi> Consider
05:31 < zipcpi> lo broda ku po'o cu brode
05:31 < zipcpi> lo po'o broda cu brode
05:31 < zipcpi> fa po'o lo broda cu brode
05:31 < zipcpi> What do they mean?
05:31 < gleki> 1=3
05:32 < zipcpi> OK, so you say 1=3, which seems to match common usage...
05:32 < zipcpi> But what about
05:32 < zipcpi> ca po'o lo broda cu brode
05:32 < zipcpi> coi la selpa'i
05:32 < zipcpi> You might want to read the upscroll
05:32 < Amnadya> .o'ai
05:33 < zipcpi> Since it deals with your favorite thing... scope
05:33 < Amnadya> In current usage 1=2=3. But 3 only = 1 because everything else is highly inconvenient with those in UI
05:33 < Roflknife34> But does everybody love someone?
05:34 < Amnadya> 3 *should* be distinct
05:34 < Amnadya> 1=2 is not controversial.
05:34 < zipcpi> Amnadya: Exactly, which is clearer when switching {fa} with a sumtcita
05:34 < Amnadya> The other scope is {lo broda po'o} which is != all the others
05:35 < zipcpi> OK that's really interesting
05:35 < zipcpi> Maybe there's actually a use for {sei'o}/NF then :p
05:36 < Amnadya> I've said a million times how inconvenient {ji'a}'s and {po'o}'s grammar is. I proposed BAhE, but maybe NAhE is also possible. Problem is it breaks all past usage.
05:36 < zipcpi> lol
05:36 < gleki> someone could finally add this to le uitki https://gist.github.com/durka/6b01c1e2ff4293457f6b
05:37 < zipcpi> exp: na'e mi cu broda
05:37 < Amnadya> In any case, I agree that {ca po'o ko'a} should not != {ca ko'a po'o}
05:37 < mensi> ([na'e mi LUhU] [cu {broda VAU}])
05:37 < gleki> alta: na'e mi cu broda
05:37 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <na'e mi LUhU>} {cu <broda NF> VAU}])
05:37 < gleki> :P
05:37 < Amnadya> It's just currently the case because of said annoying grammar of po'o
05:37 < Amnadya> Nobody wants to add in all those {ku}
05:37 < Roflknife34> ma jatna la Lojban I need to complain to them
05:37 < Roflknife34> :P
05:37 < Amnadya> Complain about what?
05:38 < gleki> who is jatna today?
05:38 < zipcpi> po'o'e, ji'a'e (Eulojban peu'o, jeu'a) zo'o
05:38 < Amnadya> {mi dansu ca lo cabdei .i mi go'i pu ji'a lo cabdei}
05:38 < Amnadya> Useful usage where {ji'a} attaches to {pu}
05:39  * zipcpi nods
05:39 < ctefaho> Amnadya: What, in your opinion, would be the ideal grammar for po'o and ji'a?
05:40 < Amnadya> Some prefix selma'o like BAhE or NAhE.
05:40 < ctefaho> je'e
05:41 < menli> camxes: na'e ke mi joi do
05:41 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
05:41  * gleki warning: your free cmavo space is depleted. Please free up more space. Start Cleaner now?
05:41 < zipcpi> lol
05:41 < Amnadya> Another suggestion was to create a cmavo that turns any UI into BAhE
05:41 < gleki> alta: na'e ke mi joi do
05:41 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <na'e (¹ke [mi {joi do}] KEhE¹) LUhU>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
05:42 < ctefaho> I sort of consider ba'e/za'e to expand to bi'a/zi'a
05:42 < zipcpi> Huh...
05:42 < menli> gerna: na'e bo ke mi joi do
05:42 < Amnadya> lol "expand"
05:42 < gleki> zantufa: na'e ke mi joi do
05:42 < zantufa> ([na'e {ke <mi (¹joi do¹)> KEhE}] VAU)
05:42 < mensi> O_0
05:42 < ctefaho> yes "expand"
05:43 < Amnadya> Btw, as always {voi} is another solution.
05:43 < gleki> now we need another set to go to the left
05:43 < zipcpi> What happend to {LUhU}?
05:43 < ctefaho> but as others seem to abuse primary stress and explicit ja'a as their means of emphasis, not such a big deal
05:43 < zipcpi> How does {voi}/{poi'i} help here?
05:43 < Amnadya> Avoiding the pesky {ku} in {lo broda ku po'o [cu] brode} can be done with {lo broda cu voi ke'a po'o brode}. (I do this now and then)
05:43 < gleki> it's an exchange of captives. {ba'e/za'e} go to the right. {po'o/ji'a} go to the left.
05:44 < gleki> zantufa: na'e ke mi joi do cu mo
05:44 < zantufa> ([na'e {ke <mi (¹joi do¹)> KEhE}] cu [mo VAU])
05:44 < zipcpi> Amnadya: OK, but what if {lo broda} isn't the first sumti?
05:44 < Amnadya> Then you're fucked. zo'o
05:44 < zipcpi> lol
05:45 < menli> What do you think of using {FA ko'a zo'u...} for shared sumti in a connected bridi?
05:45 < gleki> zipcpi: then as someone said "It surely doesn't. Alas for altást."
05:46 < Amnadya> (*another* but unacceptably verbose option: {fu'e po'o lo broda fu'o})
05:46 < zipcpi> I don't get it
05:46 < gleki> https://www.reddit.com/r/Ithkuil/comments/3d09vh/is_ca_affix_recursion_possible/
05:46 < zipcpi> Amnadya: Perhaps if there was a version of {fu'e} that only works for one sumti
05:46 < gleki> gerna: na'e bo mi cu mo
05:46 < mensi> (0[{na'e bo mi LU'U} cu {mo VAU}])0
05:47 < gleki> no idea what guskant did to LUhU
05:47 < Amnadya> zantufa: ke po'o lo broda cu mo
05:47 < zantufa> ([{ke po'o} {lo broda KU} KEhE] cu [mo VAU])
05:47 < zipcpi> Or like I said, BAhE versions of po'o and ji'a... but what should they be?
05:47 < Amnadya> Well...
05:48 < zipcpi> Huh
05:48 < ctefaho> po'oi'oi si
05:48 < gleki> en: po'a
05:48 < mensi> po'a = [BAI] ponse modal, 1st place: with possessor/owner... |>>> See ponse, po |>>>
05:48 < mensi> spheniscine
05:48 < gleki> someone stole {po'a}
05:49 < zipcpi> ... guskant did it first T.T
05:49 < gleki> en: ja'u
05:49 < mensi> 7 da se tolcri: ja'urjukni, ja'urjuknis, ja'urxe'a, molja'u, dzixe'a, dzixejbo'u,
05:49 < mensi> xantajycalku
05:49 < gleki> luckily not ja'u
05:49 < Amnadya> po'a: fi'o spoja be ri'a lo nu lo jbobau cu plujydu'e fe'u
05:49 < zipcpi> u'i
05:49 < Amnadya> Don't take my ja'u
05:49 < gleki> but then you dot have any more cmavo space on your hard drive for cache file :P
05:49 < gleki> but then you dont have any more cmavo space on your hard drive for cache file :P
05:50 < gleki> zo ja'u mo
05:50 < zipcpi> I like the {ke} thing, but it only works in zantufa?
05:50 < Amnadya> exp: ke mi
05:50 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [uU] or [yY] but "i" found.
05:50 < gleki> alta: ke mi mo
05:50 < mensi> (NIhO [I {ke <FA mi> KEhE} {mo VAU}])
05:51 < zipcpi> alta: ke po'o mi mo
05:51 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<ke po'o> <FA mi> KEhE} {mo VAU}])
05:51 < gleki> i think it's the issue still lying there in ilmentufa Issues section
05:51 < Amnadya> I already used {ke} when attaching UI to brivla, but it wasn't possible before to use on sumti!
05:51 < zipcpi> Hm yeah it's kinda important for logical connectives too
05:51 < gleki> https://github.com/Ilmen-vodhr/ilmentufa/issues/118
05:51 < gleki> cu'u la xorxes That's inherited from the LALR(1) limitations of YACC. The same applies to
05:51 < gleki> "ke broda gi'e brode ke'e gi'a brodi". It shouldn't be hard to fix with PEG.
05:52 < gleki> so more like a bug
05:52 < zipcpi> je'e
05:52 < gleki> not an official feature
05:53 < gleki> altatufa isn't fixed completely in it in bridi part due to lots of te sumti detector rules
05:53 < zipcpi> I'll probably use {ke po'o} now
05:53 < gleki> alta: ke broda gi'e brode ke'e gi'a brodi
05:53 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
05:53 < gleki> clearly
05:53 < zipcpi> T.T
05:53 < gleki> zantufa: ke broda gi'e brode ke'e gi'a brodi
05:53 < zantufa> (CU [ke {<broda VAU> <gi'e CU (¹brode VAU¹) VAU>} ke'e VAU] [gi'a CU {brodi VAU} VAU])
05:53 < Amnadya> zipcpi: I think I will, too.
05:54 < gleki> Amnadya: xu do jinvi lo du'u zo po'o cu ei cmavo na'e zo ui
05:54 < Amnadya> no'e go'i
05:55 < Amnadya> .i ro lo re cumki cu plixau
05:55 < zipcpi> I think it's kinda like BAhE, both prefix and postfix could be useful
05:55 < Amnadya> fi su'o da
05:55 < gleki> fau lo nu zo po'o cu cupr lo sko'opu cu frica lo drata cnima'o i ja'o na jetnu snima'o i ni'iku cmavo lo drata
05:55 < gleki> i oi mi cikysre
05:55 < gleki> i oi mi ciskysre
05:55 < gleki> fau lo nu zo po'o cu cupra lo sko'opu cu frica lo drata cnima'o i ja'o na jetnu cnima'o i ni'iku cmavo lo drata
05:55 < zipcpi> ue do pilno lo zi'ejvo iau zo'o
05:56 < gleki> ma zi'ejvo
05:56 < gleki> i lo zi'ejvo cu mo
05:56 < zipcpi> zo cikysre
05:56 < gleki> en: zi'ejvo
05:56 < mensi> [< zifre lujvo ≈ Free affix compound] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
05:56 < mensi> zi'ejvo[6367], zifyjvo[6978], zifryjvo[8008], zifylujvo[9037], zi'erlujvo[9526], ...
05:56 < zipcpi> .y. na se jbovlaste
05:56 < gleki> cikysre = x1 accidentally makes a mistype in the word x2 ({ciskysre} by default)
05:56 < Amnadya> ziflu'o zo'o sai
05:57 < zipcpi> skicu lo lujvo poi selpau lo rafsi poi na se javni
05:57 < zipcpi> la selpa'i cu finti
05:58 < gleki> i havent fixed that {ke} problem in altatufa because im suffering from DCY rule violation that i did to altatufa.
05:58 < Amnadya> zi'ejvo : x1 lujvo x2 gi'e poi'i lo finti be ke'a cu gleua li no lo rafsi javni
05:58 < zipcpi> u'i
05:58 < gleki> tu'a zo gleua vajni sidbo vau zo'onai
05:58 < gleki> pe'i
05:59 < gleki> i ma drata xe fanva fi lo lojbo fo lo lojbo
05:59 < gleki> i lu mi na kurji li'u xu i mabla
05:59 < Amnadya> go'i
05:59 < zipcpi> nasai vajni mi
05:59 < gleki> i lu na vajni mi li'u xu
05:59 < Amnadya> dramau
05:59 < gleki> na mulno dunli
06:00 < zipcpi> no'aiva'e vajni
06:00 < gleki> i da'i lo nu broda na vajni mi ije ku'i mi ca'o zukte lo ka broda
06:00 < Amnadya> x1 dukse lo ka to'e vajni x2 kei lo nu x2 cusku zo .oi ja cu pante vau va'o lo srana be x1
06:06 < zipcpi> me'ei gleua cu ka'ei bo'a mo'ebo'eva'ei se vajni bo'i jecu malsku
06:06 < gleki> la'a la'a
06:07 < zipcpi> .y. bo'a na bi'ai malsku
06:07 < zipcpi> le cusku cu malsku
06:08 < zipcpi> .y. zo malsku je zo malvla na se jbovlaste
06:08 < Amnadya> me'a kulpa
06:08 < zipcpi> u'i
06:09 < Amnadya> koi la su da jmina ro lo re mei
06:09 < Amnadya> .i ba'a nai mi pu troci tu'a lo re moi .i ku'i fliba lo ka finti lo ve skicu poi mansa mi
06:09 < zipcpi> ku'i mi na djuno lo du lo terbri cu ei mokau
06:10 < zipcpi> ie
06:10 < zipcpi> le terbri cu jai nabmi do ji'a la'a
06:11 < Amnadya> .i ji'a xu su da malvla fi lo jbobau
06:11 < Amnadya> ba'e pu'i
06:11 < zipcpi> zo gleua je zo oi'o
06:12 < zipcpi> ju'ocu'i
06:12 < Amnadya> ju'o nai (to na djuno toi)
06:12 < zipcpi> mi na birti tau zo oi'o .i simsa lo nu troci lo ka ca'engau
06:13 < zipcpi> kei ju'ei no'e snada
06:14 < Amnadya> (to ta'o ke'u .i'e sai do jbota'a sei mi je'a .i'onmo toi)
06:15 < gleki> lo'e jbopre na jbota'a
06:15 < zipcpi> u'i
06:15 < Amnadya> (to na ku so'i da snada lo ka galfi lo nu ze'u casnu bau lo glico kei lo nu co'a je'a jbota'a toi)
06:16  * Amnadya ca nitcu je .aidji lo ka jukpa
06:16 < zipcpi> je'e
06:21 < zipcpi> ei mi gunka co'o
06:51 < durka42> coi
07:32 < gleki> coi
07:33 < gleki> dy
07:33 < gleki> to me'o dy sinxa lo dotco toi
07:34 < niftg> .ai mi ji'a rinsa
07:43 < durka42> coi la .niftyg.
07:44 < durka42> to mi ca zvati lo dotygu'e
07:45 < niftg> coi dy ki'a nai bu'o
07:47 < niftg> pu'i xu penmi lo dotygu'e jbopre
07:48 < niftg> .u'a nai jorne spofu za'a
08:01 < gleki> alta: puza lo djedi mi kelci lo gentufa
08:01 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<(¹pu KU¹) (¹za [lo {djedi NF} KU]¹)> <FA mi>} {CU <kelci NF> <FE (¹lo [gentufa NF] KU¹)> VAU}])
08:02 < gleki> i want to somehow show that {za} is a tense_modal_modifier. but im not sure how
08:07 < gleki> alta: ca vi pu za mi pu za mo
08:07 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA ZOhE> <ca KU> <vi KU> <pu za> mi} {CU <(¹pu za¹) mo> VAU}])
08:07 < gleki> maybe like this
08:19 < gleki> I only see that slotting is needed here but how to present it ... sanji no da
08:19 < gleki> i la'a vajni falonuco'u glita'a
08:23 < durka42> mabla kibterjo'e
08:23 < durka42> xu .akti
08:26 < Amnadya> coi do
08:26 < niftg> coi
08:27 < gleki> i mi co'u djica lo nu zo za cmavo lo na se cmavo be zo pu
08:31 < gleki> i ai mi fatne stika la altatufa
08:33 < durka42> lo sumtcita nunpamebi cu banli
08:36 < gleki> mi pensi lo nu smuni
08:37 < gleki> i zo za cnegau lo ma'oi pu sumtcita
08:37 < gleki> i va'i lu uinai li'u simsa lu puzi li'u
08:38 < Amnadya> mo lu pu ku mi klama zi lo mentu li'u
08:39 < gleki> ji'a simsa lu uinai li'u
08:39 < gleki> i mi na djuno lo du'u ta'i makau gentufa
08:39 < Amnadya> mi za'o jijnu lo du'u lo'u pu za le'u je ro srana cu logji spofu
08:40 < gleki> i ei o gentufa cu cupra lo cnino ke sko'opu linji
08:40 < gleki> sa
08:40 < gleki> i ei lo gentufa cu cupra lo cnino ke sko'opu linji
08:40 < Amnadya> .i ku'i mi lazni ja'e lo nu nu'o troci lo ka je'urja'o
08:40 < gleki> i xu lu puje za li'u logji nunprane zmadu
08:43 < Amnadya> mi jijnu
08:44 < gleki> ma noi jbocei cu djuno lo satci smuni be zo za ibo paunai
08:45 < durka42> u'i
08:47 < durka42> Amnadya: ai pei ba cusku lu pujeza li'u
08:47 < gleki> i tcini falonu ba'e lo nu pilno cu rinka lo nu le bangu cu zenba lo ka jai se skicu  fai lo xo kau tcila
08:47 < Amnadya> .ai na'i .i sa'u va'o lo nu da'i lu pu za li'u na'e drani cu ba bilga lo ka cusku lo drata .i ku'i nu'o djuno fa ma'a
08:48 < durka42> je'e
08:48 < durka42> ie
08:48 < gleki> i lo nu ba'e pilno lu puza li'u ba rinka lo nu ma'a zmadu jimpe fi lo smuni be zo za
08:48 < gleki> i cati lu puza li'u pagbu lo rarbau i'a jbobau
08:49 < gleki> i a'o na ambigu
08:49 < gleki> i va'o da'i lo nu na ambigu vau no da nabmi lo pilno i po'o nabmi lo skicu noi va'i jboskepre
08:51 < gleki> i ja'o mi fliba lo ka jimpe tu'a ma'oi zi i ai jai gau spofu sa i ai cikre lo drata pagbu be la altatufa
09:20  * nuzba @Rodericus: @markandeyaka @subetealanutria (como el lojban). Depende… Lo de la estética con el esperanto lo he visto como crítica muchas veces, [http://bit.ly/1HCPELU]
09:44 < Ilmen> I've created this page, feel free to suggest improvements or better wordings:  http://mw.lojban.org/papri/BPFK_style_guidelines_for_Lojban_dictionary_definitions_%28proposal_draft%29
09:48  * nuzba @Rodericus: @markandeyaka @subetealanutria Por cierto, la lógica del lojban, por ejemplo, va en otro sentido, en el de la morfosintaxis, con resultados [http://bit.ly/1LkP75s]
09:50 < gleki> i have nothing to add. what i earlier suggested has already been implemented in La Bangu Google Spreadsheet source file: sumti types, splitting of definitions into several cells, glossing each place as nouns, as verbs, semantic families, frames, cross-links, examples, export to different formats ...
09:51 < gleki> take from there.
09:51 < gleki> e.g. attitudinals should clear show what is {ui} and what is {uinai}. not that "attitudinal: happiness - not-happiness" (?!)
09:52 < Ilmen> je'e
09:53 < gleki> it's just that i can repeat every single aspect of it.
09:53 < gleki> e.g. how are you going to generate English-to-Lojban dictionary.
09:53 < gleki> It is also a question what ideal style should be and what style can be supported by current JVS 1.0
09:54 < Ilmen> gleki: As for the jbo→epo translation, I've done more than half of it last night. I will continue later today, and add the result to the Google Doc.
09:54 < gleki> ki'e
09:59 < Ilmen> gleki: Yeah, the best solution for guidelines is to list ideal solutions together with recommendations for dealing with JVS's restrictions
10:01 < Ilmen> for example "Examples translations would ideally have a dedicated field, or for lack of it, be put into the note field."
10:03 < gleki> the problem is even if BPFK adopts some guidelines under  JVS 1.0 restrictions who will fix existing defs given that JVS 2.0 will present new possibilities?
10:03 < gleki> who will fix knowing that in future JVS 2.0 will recommend re-fixing again
10:05 < Ilmen> ua nai ru'e
10:06 < gleki> if guidelines are applied then people will probably have to fix existing defs, right?
10:11 < Ilmen> Those would be recommendations, not obligations
10:12 < Ilmen> They would encourage word creators to use them and to try bettering existing definitions
10:14 < gleki> but then when JVS 2.0 is out new recommandations will be out making older one obsolete.
10:14 < Ilmen> I'm not sure what to do for the gismu official definitions, which clearly don't comply to the clarity and readability requirements of the proposed guidelines :p
10:14 < Ilmen> Maybe they'd invite people to propose better competing definitions
10:14 < Ilmen> which may be officially approved later
10:16 < gleki> oh maybe first develop an appropriate ideal realization of the dictionary and then edit them as we wish
10:16 < gleki> or maybe first develop an appropriate ideal realization of the dictionary and then edit them as we wish
10:33 < cliva> spagetufa: +rafcla merdjygau lo zi'evlyvla jo'u zo'e li'o
10:33 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?!\u0020] or end of input but "m" found.
10:33 < spagetufa> Unrecognized option rafcla - use 'spagetufa: +help' for a list of all options
10:33 < cliva> spagetufa: +rafcau merdjygau lo zi'evlyvla jo'u zo'e li'o
10:33 < spagetufa> (CU [mèrdjygau {<FE (¹[lo zi'èvlyvla KU] jo'u [zo'e li'o]¹)> VAU}])
10:33 < Ilmen> doi la gleki mi toltce se nandu tau lu ko lanli lo se cuxna be fi lo nu sivni do’e lo do skami li'u
10:34 < gleki> y
10:34 < durka42> ma claxu lo rafsi
10:34 < Ilmen> go'i
10:34 < cliva> lo vlaturge'a poi se pilno va'o lo nu zo rafcla cu .optiio se cuxna
10:36 < cliva> y zo rafcau
10:36 < durka42> ua drata vlatuge
10:36 < cliva> milxe co drata
10:36 < durka42> ku'i curmi fa'u tolcurmi lo mintu xu
10:36 < cliva> .i ru'a ro se curmi be lo fadni vlatuge cu se curmi lo rafcau
10:36 < cliva> .i lo fatne zo'u lo rafcau cu curmi zo'oi merdjygau mu'a
10:37 < durka42> ua ue
10:37 < cliva> .i na mulno lo ka jetnu kei fa lo du claxu lo rafsi .i lo valslinku'i javni za'o pagbu
10:37 < gleki> Ilmen: i ko lanli lo nu sivni vau se cuxna pe lo do skami
10:37 < gleki> i pei
10:37 < Ilmen> gleki: "Analizu tion, kio elektitas inter ..."
10:37 < Ilmen> ua
10:37 < Ilmen> je'e
10:38 < gleki> inter privatado de via komputilo
10:39 < Ilmen> .i lanli lo pu se cu'uxna be fo lo ka sepi'o ce'u lo datni pe lo skami cu snura se mipri
10:39 < gleki> clani
10:39 < gleki> u'i
10:40 < Ilmen> lanli lo pu se cu'uxna be fo lo ka nurgau lo sivni datni
10:40 < gleki> sivni datni se cuxna lanli
10:41 < Ilmen> je'e
10:50 < Ilmen> lu ko na pilno pa lerpoijaspu lo vrici jaspu li'u ŭa nai ru'e
10:50 < Ilmen> .i lo jaspu na zilkai
10:51 < cliva> .i za'a ji'i re da pe le vlatuge za'o cfila
10:51 < durka42> ko'oi na ku pa lerpoijaspu fo lo vrici
10:51 < cliva> si zi'e cfila
10:51 < durka42> y
10:51 < cliva> spagetufa: cizdaklybroda
10:51 < spagetufa> (CU [ciz/dakly/bròda VAU])
10:51 < durka42> ko'oi naku pada lerpoijaspu fo lo vrici
10:51 < cliva> spagetufa: +rafcau cizdaklybroda
10:51 < spagetufa> ([FA {<ci BOI> zdaklybròda KU}] VAU)
10:52 < cliva> spagetufa: +rafcau genrkasu
10:52 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [oO] but "e" found.
10:52 < durka42> uh oh
10:52 < cliva> .i ku'i ro valsi poi ca da se pilno zo'u cipyzu'e tau ki .i si'au lo re mei ku po'o co'e
10:52 < cliva> .i go'e ba'o
10:53 < durka42> naku pada lerpoijaspu ko fi so'i da
10:55 < Ilmen> mi jmina ca ti doi la gleki
10:55 < Ilmen> fe lo mi xe fanva
10:56 < durka42> xu do fanva la'au slari vanjba
10:56 < Ilmen> .i pei doi la gleki
10:57 < Ilmen> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iDee0cS55ogA2QSxaNE_nFnFSaYtBMltpK4q6R8n2qU/edit#
10:57 < Ilmen> durka42 ^
10:57 < durka42> ua
10:57 < durka42> lo mi kibyterjo'e cu mabla .i mi ba viska ca lo za'umoi co nanca
10:57 < Ilmen> .ei pei mi jmina lo mi cmene doi la gleki
10:58 < durka42> ua ba'o mulnybi
10:58 < Ilmen> .i je'e la .durkas.
10:58 < durka42> uabu'o lo spofu fonxa selkei cu co'e
10:58 < Ilmen> Guten Tag :)
10:59 < Ilmen> ki'ai gunta tagji
10:59 < durka42> gu tenta gi co'e
11:00 < Ilmen> ta'o nai xu lo se gasnu be mi cu mapti lo pu se cpedu be do doi la gleki .i va'i ŭo pei
11:01 < Ilmen> .oi se'i lo pa zo lo snada lo ka nerkla lo mi spero vlamei
11:03 < durka42> .u'i
11:03 < durka42> lo spero nu xorlo
11:05 < Amnadya> .u'e Bob participating on lojban-beginners
11:05 < cliva> ... ki'u ma zoi fa stressed_y_less_rafsi? initial_pair y fa pagbu la slinku'i ku noi javni
11:05 < cliva> .i pagbu fe ji'a lo me la catni .camxes. moi
11:07 < durka42> consonant y_less_rafsi* stressed_y_less_rafsi? initial_pair y
11:07 < Amnadya> .itku'ile ga'a mi noi ke po'o lo to'anzu vlaturge'a noi sampu sai cu slabu ke'a
11:08 < durka42> c pat pat pat cly
11:08 < durka42> k: cpatpatpatcly
11:08 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "c" found.
11:08 < durka42> k: cpatpatpatcli
11:08 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "c" found.
11:08 < cliva> spagetufa: +Rslinkuhi_ignore cpatpatpatclybroda
11:08 < spagetufa> (cpatpatpatcly [b r o d a])
11:08 < cliva> iep
11:08 < durka42> uanai .i no brivla cu se fanmo .ybu
11:09 < Ilmen> ua ISTM = It seems to me
11:09 < cliva> .ai vimcu lo ka'e se pedgycu'a je cu refcfagau lo cipra
11:09 < cliva> .i lo me zo genrkasu moi zo'u pu sampu fa lo nu cikre vau ta'o
11:10 < Amnadya> b r o d a
11:11 < cliva> ciprdebuge po'o .optiio
11:13 < Ilmen> cfikalte te cuxna
11:13 < cliva> ki'e
11:13 < Ilmen> xu naku melbi fa zo cfikalte
11:13 < Ilmen> :)
11:14 < Ilmen> lo cfika kalte cu cfikalte
11:14 < cliva> spagetufa: +Rslinkuhi_ignore cpatpatpatclybroda
11:14 < spagetufa> (cpatpatpatcly [b r o d a])
11:15 < cliva> spagetufa: +Rslinkuhi_ignore cpatpatpatclybroda
11:15 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected undefined but "c" found.
11:15 < cliva> spagetufa: cizdaklybroda
11:15 < spagetufa> (CU [ciz/dakly/bròda VAU])
11:15 < cliva> spagetufa: +rafcau cizdaklybroda
11:15 < spagetufa> (CU [cizdaklybròda VAU])
11:17 < cliva> .i lo se'irci vreji cipra zo'u snada
11:19 < Amnadya> .oi .i ko morjigau .e'o mi lo su'u ma kau tadji lo ka gau ce la korpora-zei-sisku cu cupra lo lujvo liste
11:20 < cliva> mi na pilno KZS te zu'e ku .i gasnu lo nu la .camxes. cu gentufa ro brivla poi pagbu lo vreji
11:21 < cliva> (to ta'o .ei pei lo vlavelcki be zo gentufa cu se stika toi)
11:21 < gleki> Ilmen: ei do jmina lo do cmene
11:21 < Amnadya> je'e .i ku'i mi na tavla fi lo me do moi
11:49  * nuzba @Kohelang: アンケートでlojban書いたのおかゆ？ [http://bit.ly/1Icu8iC]
12:10 < clakre> .i mi na jimpe fi lu "me do moi" li'u
12:11 < clakre> because do is not a cardinal number
12:13 < clakre> so can moi be used for things that are not numbers then?
12:13 < Amnadya> {me SUMTI moi} is a special grammar rule
12:14 < clakre> je'e
12:14 < Amnadya> Originally invented so that you can use {moi} with complicated math expressions, .e.g {me li pa su'i pa me'u moi}
12:14 < Amnadya> "The [1+1]th"
12:15 < Amnadya> (where "complicated" is anything that isn't just a string of digits)
12:16 < Amnadya> But {me mi moi} means "mine"
12:16 < Amnadya> {me do moi} "yours"
12:16 < Amnadya> (me-th, you-th)
12:17 < clakre> ki'e!
12:38 < Ilmen> je'e la gleki
12:42 < Ilmen> .i lo pa moi linji zo'u la'a gau mi zo gi'a zo gi'e basti
12:42 < Ilmen> .i linji seju vlali'i
12:43 < Ilmen> .i ta'o ma poi drata cu kansa fi lo linsi nu fanva
12:59 < Amnadya> ma'a co'a jimpe lo du'u lu ma poi li'u drani na ku
12:59 < Amnadya> .i .ei co'a pilno lo drani
13:10 < Ilmen> .a'o naku ba zi facki lo du'u lo'u to'e mu'i nai li'u ja lo'u ki'e sidju le'u ja lo'u ma kau le'u cu mulno lo ka toldra
13:10 < Ilmen> .i sa'e .a'o jitfa .u'i
13:12 < Ilmen> .i ji'a lo du'u ge zo lo drani naku gi zo le drani ro da
13:14 < Ilmen> .i mi di'u xamsku .i .u'i ĭa nai
13:19 < Ilmen> Amnadya: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/BPFK_style_guidelines_for_Lojban_dictionary_definitions_%28proposal_draft%29  ---  ŭa pei .i .e'o do'o zifre lo ka stidi
13:20 < Ilmen> .i la'a mi ca lo nu mansa banzuni cu cpedi lo ka cmicu'a ku lo kamni menre
13:20 < Ilmen> se ju cmima
13:20 < Ilmen> .i je'au cpedu
13:30  * nuzba @ishimirai: アポストロフィーはタイピングするうえでデメリットだな。エスペラントはもう古い！プログラミングもできる最も完成された人工言語 - ロジバン - Wikipedia https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%AD%E3%82%B8%E3%83%90%E3%83%B3 [http://bit.ly/1Gu529A]
14:38 < durka42> xm
14:38 < durka42> ka'eku mi voikla la .berlin.
14:38 < Amnadya> ue
14:40 < durka42> li ji'i renono cu jdima lo nu vofli litru la .stutygart. ce'o la .berlin. ce'o la .frankfrt.
14:41 < durka42> to li'a lo xotli ji'a cu jai se jdima
14:41 < Amnadya> li'a kargu sai .i pa mei lo krinu be lo nu mi uenmo
14:41 < durka42> ku'i .ei mi catlu la gacri ckana je cersai
14:42 < durka42> do cusku lo sedu'u lo nunvoi ji lo xotli cu kargu sai
14:42 < Amnadya> lo xotli
14:42 < Amnadya> si
14:42 < Amnadya> .u'i
14:42 < Amnadya> .i lo nu voikla
14:45 < durka42> ku'i cumki fa lo nu nalmabla .iki'ubo lo ckule cu pleji fo lo .tubingen. pagbu be lo nunli'u
14:46 < durka42> mi ca'o retsku lo sedu'u .ei mi vitke makau .i noda poi remei cu jinvi lo pamei
14:47 < Amnadya> .y di'u
14:47 < Amnadya> mi co'a snada lo ka smadi lo du'u ma kau smuni se djica
14:48 < durka42> .ei mi klama la .berlin. je la .munytcen. je la xekri cicfoi je la .paris. je je je je
14:48 < Amnadya> .i na djuno .i lo ze'u xabju be la .berlin. co'u manci lo cinri dinju
14:48 < durka42> li'a
14:49 < durka42> .i la cliva cu xabju ma
14:49 < durka42> ku'i li'a tezu'e lo nu litru kei mi pensi lo jboprenunpe'i po'onai
14:50 < Amnadya> xabju lo xelveto ke ralju tcadu
14:50 < Amnadya> .i tsurixi
14:51 < durka42> ie la tsurixi ji'a cu jai se stidi vau .u'i
14:51 < durka42> ku'i la .suuitserland. cu jai kargu ti'e
14:53 < durka42> lo tolkargyrai be lo gairckajvecersai co'e zo'u li rebi cu jdima tu'a lo pa nicte
14:53 < durka42> .i na nalcumki .u'i
14:53 < durka42> .ei mi pensi pensi
14:55 < durka42> to lo smadi jufra zo'u lo ro prenu cu simxu lo ka drata fi lo ka jinvi makau
14:57 < durka42> ua na tolkargyrai .i pada sejdima li repa .iku'i lo dukse zabna simsu ta'e naljetnu ba'a
15:00 < Ilmen> cu dai
15:00 < Ilmen> ni'o di'ai te cuxna lanli
15:02 < durka42> zo ta'e basti zo cu
15:02 < Ilmen> ŭa mi tcidu srera
15:02 < Ilmen> pe tcidu zo na'e fi zo ta'e
15:03 < durka42> je'e
15:05 < durka42> ni'o .ei mi sipna ga'u lo nunjdice
15:06 < Ilmen> Vielleicht bin ich zu sehr müde.
15:07 < durka42> mi na se bangu lo dotco
15:07 < Ilmen> Gute Nacht.
15:07 < Amnadya> lu zu müde li'u drani
15:07 < Ilmen> va'i la'a mi tatpi dukse
15:07 < Ilmen> ŭa ki'e stidi ja dragau
15:08 < Amnadya> .ei ca su da gasnu lo jbonunsla be bu'u lo do cmana
15:08 < Ilmen> .i dukse lo ka simsa lo me lo glibau moi .u'i
15:08 < Amnadya> zo müde ckilu valsi .i se ki'u bo zo sehr na sarcu
15:09 < Amnadya> .i pilno zo sehr va'o lo na'e ckilu valsi no'u mu'a zo zögern
15:09 < Ilmen> je'e .i gau do mi cilre .i'o
15:09 < Amnadya> Du hast zu sehr gezögert
15:10 < Amnadya> You hesitated too much
15:10 < Ilmen> do cuxpei dukse
15:10 < durka42> ba'e mi roroi cuxpei dukse
15:10 < durka42> co'o
15:10 < Amnadya> co'o
15:11 < Ilmen> co'o
15:11 < Ilmen> mi'e si'abzu
15:11 < Amnadya> je'e co'o do ji'a
15:41 < Exodus> Coi!
15:46 < Amnadya> coi
15:46 < raien> coi
15:47 < raien> do mo
15:47 < Amnadya> tatpi ki'u lo nu nicte
15:48 < Amnadya> .i do mo
15:48 < raien> tatpi ji'a
17:01 < noncomcinse> Is Lojbanwiseuse crimethink?
17:02 < noncomcinse> .i mi tcidu la'e la'au pasobivo li
17:02 < noncomcinse> si li'u
17:53 < zipcpi> be'e mensi
18:06 < noncomcinse> mo coi
18:07 < zipcpi> coi
18:08 < zipcpi> xu do pu viska tau la e'ulojban
18:10 < noncomcinse> nago'i
18:11 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Eulojban
18:12 < noncomcinse> ua
18:13 < noncomcinse> Speaking of valid cipra dipthongs, is {uai} ([why]) a thing anywhere?
18:13 < zipcpi> It is, but it has a different meaning
18:13 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/uai
18:14 < noncomcinse> The meaning isn't as important as the valid dipthong being a thing.
18:14 < zipcpi> Ah, then yes
18:14 < noncomcinse> xu do selsau zo cu
18:14 < noncomcinse> si zo cu'au
18:14 < zipcpi> ja'a
18:14 < noncomcinse> I thought of a better idea than that.
18:14 < zipcpi> Ah... you may also want to look at {i'au}
18:15 < noncomcinse> I've seen it.
18:15 < zipcpi> K
18:15 < zipcpi> So what's the idea?
18:15 < noncomcinse> ca'e: replace current cu'au definition
18:16 < noncomcinse> zo cu'au famyma'o ma'oi cu'ai
18:16 < noncomcinse> And basically, cu'ai lets you set a point in forethought to terminate to.
18:17 < zipcpi> lol cu'ai is taken by one of Curtis' meksyma'o... kinda annoying that... wish we could just get rid of them all and use brimekso instead
18:17 < zipcpi> Hmm... this is different from {fu'e}... {fu'o}?
18:18 < noncomcinse> .i mi pensi lonu mi puza ckaji cu'ai loka cnino loka tadni la .lojban. [ku vaukeiku vaukeiku] cu'au .e loka nitcu lonu lo vlaste cu sidju mi loka tavla fo la .lojban.
18:19 < noncomcinse> fu'e/fu'o sets UI over a space, I thought.
18:19 < zipcpi> Ah
18:19 < zipcpi> So you mean, cu'ai sets a "level" to terminate to
18:19 < noncomcinse> Yeah.
18:19 < noncomcinse> And you can stack them.
18:20 < zipcpi> Hmm... quite similar, but maybe not identical, to my suggestion for tu'e...tu'u
18:20 < noncomcinse> stidi ma
18:20 < zipcpi> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lojban/NRUIud_OCj8
18:20 < noncomcinse> I thought of tu'e tu'u when I came up with this
18:21 < zipcpi> Longish discussion, but basically I want to be able to use tu'e...tu'u within a NU, so as to include a complex multi-statement passage in e.g. ifle2 or rivbi2
18:21 < noncomcinse> eg, "poi BRIDI soft-{.i} BRIDI ku'o"?
18:22 < zipcpi> Yes
18:22 < zipcpi> Could work in NOI too
18:22 < noncomcinse> I've wanted that, too.
18:22 < noncomcinse> any sub-bridi
18:22 < noncomcinse> xoi
18:22 < zipcpi> There is ju'ei for "soft-i" but not in any parsers yet
18:22 < noncomcinse> xm
18:23 < zipcpi> But tu'e...tu'u still has an advantage over ju'ei, namely, for very complex passages, it's nice to have a "new level 0" for .i to reset to
18:23 < noncomcinse> my idea for cu'ai/cu'au, could be replaced with gu/gi<anything>
18:24 < noncomcinse> Wait, so you want to usw tu'e to make .i not start a new sentence?
18:24 < zipcpi> It starts a new sentence alright, but the entire tu'e...tu'u goes within a sub-bridi
18:25 < zipcpi> Basically, sentences within sentences
18:25 < noncomcinse> mu'a {mi zgana lo nanmu poi tu'e jgari lo badna .i pelxu badna}, zoma famyma'o
18:25 < zipcpi> Not too different from what {lu...li'u} already does
18:25 < noncomcinse> s/zoma/zo'u ma
18:25 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: mu'a {mi zgana lo nanmu poi tu'e jgari lo badna .i pelxu badna}, zo'u ma famyma'o
18:25 < zipcpi> tu'u
18:26 < noncomcinse> any vau?
18:26 < noncomcinse> vau tu'u ku'o vau?
18:26 < zipcpi> Seems so
18:26 < zipcpi> zantufa: mi zgana lo nanmu poi tu'e jgari lo badna .i pelxu badna
18:26 < zantufa> (mi CU [zgana {lo <nanmu (¹poi [tu'e {<CU (²jgari [lo badna KU] VAU²)> <i (²CU [pelxu badna] VAU²)>} TUhU] KUhO¹)> KU} VAU])
18:27 < noncomcinse> so it starts a new sentence, but say I had {.i} at the beginning of that text. The one inside tu'e isn't the same level as the one at the beginning?
18:28 < zipcpi> Yes
18:28 < zipcpi> Like I said, lu...li'u and to...toi already work that way
18:28 < noncomcinse> With my original cu'au as wildcard famyma'o, things like to/lu made it weird if you wanted to use xiro
18:29 < zipcpi> Yeah...
18:29 < noncomcinse> Because xiro would break lu if it didn't stop.
18:29 < zipcpi> i'au does have a similar problem but I just ca'engau that it's not more powerful than .i
18:31 < noncomcinse> if you never opened a subbridi you could just use .i'au every time
18:31 < noncomcinse> not that you'd want to
18:32 < zipcpi> heh
18:32 < noncomcinse> I started reading 1984 and now I
18:33 < noncomcinse> have started talking to people in newspeak
18:33 < zipcpi> lol
18:33 < zipcpi> Not too different from lujvo :p
18:33 < noncomcinse> Honestly, I think that's why it comes so easily.
18:34 < noncomcinse> The only hard part is weird shortenings of words.
18:35 < noncomcinse> Oldspeakful wrds oft bec newspeakful unwrds.
18:36 < zipcpi> lol Eulojban... how I wish there is space for that categorical pronoun set
18:38 < zipcpi> It's exactly why I created Eulojban... it's part "how I wish there is space for this", part "personal madness room where I kill most necessasity for {kei} with NU variants", part satire
18:41 < noncomcinse> Is it the case that /θ/ counts as {'}?
18:41 < zipcpi> Theoretically yes
18:42 < noncomcinse> I had the idea for a dialect that pronounced me'oxy as /θ/ once.
18:42 < zipcpi> Ah.
18:42 < noncomcinse> And then in the last two days I actually properly learned how to do a voiced velar fricatice, as opposed to a uvular.
18:43 < zipcpi> lol
18:59 < zipcpi> It's funny, cause I even see more use for Curtis-zai'e than meksyma'o T.T
19:00 < zipcpi> That I so rudely overriden with my own zai'e :p
19:04 < zipcpi> Though I'd rather just make {lilo'o} or {me'olo'o} grammatical. I have a hard time thinking of when I'd actually want to use it in place of BY or PA
19:04 < zipcpi> And the selma'o XOhEhOhE.... I don't know how it should function
19:04 < zipcpi> Looks like it's meant to be something that can be both BY or PA
19:05 < zipcpi> {bu'o'e} I could see a use for. It's good for spelling out texts where some characters are illegible or unknown
19:06 < zipcpi> alta: lilo'o
19:06 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [uU] or [yY] but "i" found.
19:06 < zipcpi> Hm... something that Gleki needs to fix :p
19:07 < noncomcinse> zai'e?
19:08 < zipcpi> My-zai'e is a BAhE, used to mark jargon / "free-space". Even has a rafsi, -zam-
19:08 < zipcpi> Curtis-zai'e is "empty string"
19:09 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/zai'e
19:10 < zipcpi> This is a very old idea actually... came up with it during my hiatus... though my first iteration was just assigning a rafsi to {za'e}
19:10 < zipcpi> Then I thought that {za'e} should be reserved for "on-the-spot" terms and slang terms
19:12 < zipcpi> lol {zi'a} is experimental; never noticed that
19:21 < zipcpi> I probably should learn PEG someday and get my own pet parser. If I'm gonna abuse the grammar ten ways to Sunday it's nice to have a proof-of-concept
19:22 < zipcpi> Could probably even train it to recognize Eulojban pronouns lol
19:23 < zipcpi> Can't decide if I should call it maltufa or eultufa :p
19:24 < noncomcinse> en: zi'a
19:24 < mensi> zi'a = [UI3a] nonce-word indicator; indicates previous word is nonce-creation and may be nonstandard |>>> Equivalent to
19:24 < mensi> za'e but in selma'o UI. See also za'e, pe'a, xo'o |>>> gleki
19:24 < zipcpi> ba'e:bi'a za'e:zi'a
19:24 < noncomcinse> when you use tu'a
19:25 < noncomcinse> which has the equivalent jai
19:25 < noncomcinse> which has the FA place fai
19:25 < zipcpi> bi'a is also experimental lol
19:25 < noncomcinse> is there any way to do the fai for tu'a?
19:25 < zipcpi> Oh that one
19:26 < zipcpi> Yeah it's a problem that selpa'i also recognized... he talked about it in an old blog post, using {kai'a} for it. I unwittingly defined {kai'a} differently
19:27 < zipcpi> His suggestion is something like
19:27 < zipcpi> mi djuno tu'a do *kai'a lo ka kanro
19:28 < zipcpi> Something like JOI, though he also noted a use-case where he thought JOI wasn't good enough
19:29 < zipcpi> I'm not sure myself... Maybe {mi djuno tu'a do fe lo ka kanro}?
19:29 < zipcpi> Though it hasn't been quite decided how assigning two sumti to the same terbri place work
19:30 < zipcpi> {kai'i} is open if selpa'i-kai'a should prove useful
19:31 < zipcpi> But I personally think the most exemplary use-case is when you've already gone "tu'a ko'a" but want to go back and clarify it
19:32 < zipcpi> Or deliberately want to front it
19:33 < zipcpi> {kai} is one of the less-useful BAI though
19:35  * zipcpi checks KZS
19:35 < zipcpi> Hm a lot of "sekai"
19:39 < zipcpi> mensi: doi gleki Maybe allow {lilo'o} in altatufa? {me'olo'o} might be useful for "empty string"
19:39 < mensi> zipcpi: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.gleki.gy. di'a cusku da
19:40 < zipcpi> alta: li ry re dy re
19:40 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹[ry {re dy re}] BOI¹) LOhO>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
19:40 < zipcpi> alta: abu za'ure'u cusku
19:40 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "c" found.
19:40 < zipcpi> alta: abu cusku
19:40 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <a bu> BOI} {CU <cusku NF> VAU}])
19:40 < zipcpi> Huh not sure what he did there
19:41 < zipcpi> alta: abu boi za'ure'u cusku
19:41 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <a bu> boi} {CU <(¹za'u re'u¹) (¹cusku NF¹)> VAU}])
19:41 < zipcpi> zantufa: lilo'o
19:41 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [uU] .onai [yY] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
19:41 < zipcpi> spagetufa: lilo'o
19:41 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?!\u0020], [0123456789], [rR] or end of input but "l" found.
19:41 < zipcpi> Hahahaha
19:41 < zipcpi> exp: luli'u
19:41 < mensi> ([lu li'u] VAU)
19:42 < zipcpi> spagetufa: abu za'ure'u cusku
19:42 < spagetufa> (CU [{<(¹[{. <.a bu>} za'u] BOI¹) re'u> cùsku} VAU])
19:43 < zipcpi> spagetufa: +lerfu abu za'ure'u cusku
19:43 < spagetufa> ([FA {<. (¹.a bu¹)> BOI}] [CU {<(¹[za'u BOI] re'u¹) cùsku> VAU}])
19:43 < zipcpi> off: abu za'ure'u cusku
19:43 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "c" found.
19:43 < zipcpi> Riiiiight
19:44 < zipcpi> So alta isn't doing anything silly there
19:44 < zipcpi> Alta just never implemented la xornunsei
19:44 < zipcpi> Gleki doesn't like it
19:44 < noncomcinse> whar
19:44 < noncomcinse> s/r/t's that?/
19:44 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: what's that?
19:45 < zipcpi> My own name for the xorxes proposal to prevent letter-strings from containing PA
19:45 < zipcpi> Compare
19:45 < zipcpi> exp: abu za'ure'u cusku
19:45 < mensi> ([{a bu} BOI] [CU {<za'u re'u> cusku} VAU])
19:45 < noncomcinse> "me'o by cy pa"
19:46 < zipcpi> Oh yes that is affect too, which I'm not too fond of
19:46 < zipcpi> exp: me'o by cy pa
19:46 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "a" found.
19:46 < zipcpi> exp: me'o by cy pare'u
19:46 < mensi> ([{me'o <(¹by cy¹) BOI> LOhO} {pa re'u} KU] VAU)
19:47 < zipcpi> I really don't like that part. I see the {boi} problem but I use {me'o} (and even {li} for my detri system) for arbitrary character strings
19:47 < zipcpi> I invented {li'ei} purely out of protest. It has 4 votes now though o.o
19:49 < zipcpi> I do have my own suggestion for the {boi} problem in Eulojban... but it's kinda silly
19:49 < zipcpi> Basically even breaks {bypyfyky cusku} in favor of a new cmavo for multi-letteral pronouns
19:50 < zipcpi> Alternatively we could make {tei} auto-close
19:52 < zipcpi> It does have the advantage that letteral pronouns then become basically like KOhA, and won't need {boi} at all
19:52 < zipcpi> Except when you use {leu}
19:52 < zipcpi> To make a multi-letteral pronoun
19:52 < zipcpi> That can't be helped though
19:52 < zipcpi> Cost of wanting multi-letteral pronouns
19:56 < zipcpi> I did enter {leu} as {ko'ai}, but downvoted myself cause it does almost nothing for current grammar
19:58 < noncomcinse> de'a jundi
19:59 < zipcpi> je'e
20:00 < zipcpi> mensi: doi durka42 I don't know why {li'ei} has four votes. It's a protest cmavo o.o
20:00 < mensi> zipcpi: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.durka42.gy. di'a cusku da
20:04 < zipcpi> mensi: doi durka42 If you are one of the upvoters though I do thank you for joining my protest :p
20:04 < mensi> zipcpi: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.durka42.gy. di'a cusku da
20:18 < noncomcinse> di'a
20:18 < noncomcinse> en: li'ei
20:18 < mensi> li'ei = [LIhEI] arbitrary character string or irregular number |>>> Accepts any arbitrary string of BY, bu-letterals, PA.
20:18 < mensi>  Elidable terminator: lo'o. See li'ai, me'o, mo'e, li. [Tentative proposal: li'ei = li pe'o joi'i / me'o pe'o joi'i]
20:18 < mensi> |>>> spheniscine
20:19 < noncomcinse> co'o mi'e sipna
20:32 < GothAlice> coi
20:32 < mensi> GothAlice: cu'u la'o gy.selpahi.gy.: <GothAlice> Is there a directory or anything of people willing to be paid as
20:32 < mensi> consultants on Lojban? -- No, but put me on that list. I'll do anything Lojban-related for money :) |
20:32 < mensi> 2015-05-03T11:43:51.358Z
20:32 < mensi> GothAlice: cu'u la'o gy.selpahi.gy.: <GothAlice> I want full Lojban translations of the source books we'll be releasing.
20:32 < mensi> -- I just looked at the one you posted. It looks very interesting. How many are there going to be? | 2015-05-03T12:01:31.
20:32 < mensi> 342Z
20:33 < GothAlice> Say what now?
20:33 < GothAlice> A ha.
20:34 < GothAlice> mensi: Interesting auto-responder you have there!  There will be, initially, two.  The main Apex book, and the spapre one.
20:34 < mensi> xu lo nu casnu la'e di'u cu raktu do
20:36 < zipcpi> Hey crazy idea: What if we had names for all the elements built in a similar style to ISO codes
20:36 < GothAlice> We do.
20:36 < zipcpi> What... {ratnixe} = {cidro}?
20:37 < GothAlice> Ref: Ununseptium as an example of the standard Roman "normal form" of the heavier elements.
20:37 < zipcpi> ratnipapaso
20:37 < GothAlice> I.e. they're the numbers, translated, I would suspect.
20:38 < zipcpi> Well my idea is that it's like the ISO fu'ivla for languages and countries
20:38 < GothAlice> it's unambiguous, since the number of protons is "what matters" in the primary classification.  (Secondary classification, "ions", are mathematical variances in the number of electrons, and another secondary classification is in the imbalance of neutrons.)
20:38 < zipcpi> Right
20:39 < GothAlice> :)  Math makes things a touch easier, in most cases.
20:39 < zipcpi> So we have two sets, one that uses atomic numbers, one that uses the common abbreviations
20:39 < GothAlice> (So an ISO-ish form would be <protons>-<electron differential>-<neutron differential>)
20:40 < zipcpi> I think electron and neutron differential might be terbri
20:42 < GothAlice> With my understanding of {terbri}, that fits when describing what each aspect of that ISO-ish form itself is, abstractly.  I.e. "the definition of this part is defining a predicate relationship with relation {charge} among arguments [protons, electron diff, neutron diff], but I may be wrong.  ^_^
20:43 < zipcpi> E.g. {ratnime'u} (just randomly assigning -me- for empty symbol meant to make it a valid zi'evla) = {ratnisore} = x1 is a quantity of uranium with atomic weight x2 and ionic differential x3
20:43 < zipcpi> lo ratnisore be li recimu
20:44 < zipcpi> Oh wait {ratni} does already have x2 and x3
20:44 < zipcpi> It needs an x4
20:45 < GothAlice> Well, only sorta.
20:45 < GothAlice> It infers the neutron differential from the difference between atomic number and weight.
20:45 < GothAlice> (Which is lame and not explicit.)
20:45 < GothAlice> ;P
20:45 < zipcpi> No, x4 for ionic number
20:45 < zipcpi> Ionic charge
20:46 < GothAlice> http://vlasisku.lojban.org/vlasisku/ratni < has a note about {selci} mass preference
20:46 < zipcpi> Yeah
20:47 < zipcpi> Hmm... ratni is a single atom though
20:47 < GothAlice> Technically… the mass would also incorporate the electron weights.  (Which are non-zero, but typically rounded out of most presentations.)  You just need very accurate numbers to safely make the ionic inference from the existing arguments.  ;)
20:48 < zipcpi> Exactly... well I just think it's just "atomic weight" as defined by convention, rather than literal mass
20:48 < zipcpi> Which treats electrons as negligible
20:49 < zipcpi> While x4 should contain ionic charge
20:50 < zipcpi> Chemical nomenclature is... kinda problematic though
20:50 < zipcpi> We probably can and should make zi'evla for common names like "benzene"
20:51 < zipcpi> While for actually describing chemical composition or structure; well, I have the idea of using li/me'o character strings to basically allow a sort of "free grammar"
20:51 < zipcpi> Then make a special brivla to convert them into the meaning we want
20:52 < zipcpi> For example, SMILES: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_molecular-input_line-entry_system
20:54 < zipcpi> We could make *'y cmavo all BY (well except for xy'y... I have only myself to blame for that inconsistency, but I can't think of any other suitable cmavo form for that)
20:55 < zipcpi> Or possibly move it to xa'e or something
20:55 < zipcpi> xa~~~'e
21:11 < zipcpi> exp: teibu
21:11 < mensi> ([{tei bu} BOI] VAU)
21:38 < GothAlice> zipcpi: Apologies, my internet decided to get hit by lightning on me.  ^_^;  Things like the names "benzene" and whatnot are actually a mixture of greek and latin prefixes and suffixes with precise meanings.
21:38 < zipcpi> True
21:39 < zipcpi> But I think fu'ivla is best for them. Pretty much every other language (except maybe Chinese) use fu'ivla for them
21:39 < GothAlice> Worst-case example: Hexanitrohexaazaisowurtzitane
21:40 < zipcpi> Hahaha
21:40 < GothAlice> Reading aid: (these are right-to-left)
21:40 < zipcpi> I've heard of it
21:40 < GothAlice> Looks like a little house.  It's explosive, but very stable.
21:40 < GothAlice> Way, way, way, way, way too many nitrogens to make any chemist smile at a correct pronunciation.  ;P
21:41 < zipcpi> Um diddle diddle diddle um diddle BOOM! Um diddle diddle diddle um diddle BOOM!
21:41 < zipcpi> Hexanitrohexaazaisowurtzita~~ne
21:41 < GothAlice> Well, no.  Very stable.  Could hit it with a sledge hammer without causing ill effect.
21:41 < zipcpi> lol
21:41 < zipcpi> Synthethizing it though...
21:42 < zipcpi> Probably creates a lot of nasty by-products
21:42 < GothAlice> wurtz, for example, describes the shape (cage structure)
21:42 < GothAlice> Well, yeah.  Getting to the stable point is not something to do unless one owns a good pair of running shoes.
21:42 < zipcpi> Hehe
21:43 < GothAlice> Well, also, specifically, the "stable" form of it is a mixture with TNT.  Yes, TNT stabilizes this compound.
21:43 < zipcpi> Chinese name: 六硝基六氮杂异伍兹烷
21:43 < GothAlice> AKA CL-20.
21:44 < zipcpi> -wurtzitane is fu'ivla'ed. The rest is calqued
21:46 < GothAlice> However, before my internet was so curtly interrupted by nature, I had a translation / phrasing question.  How would one convey "the avatar / embodyment of the equal balance of life (giving) and death (life-taking)"?
21:47 < zipcpi> Hm only one word for avatar right now, {kibyka'i}, which is probably not what you want
21:47 < zipcpi> We could probably make two brivla for it
21:47 < GothAlice> (Avatar translating pretty literally as {krati}.)
21:48 < zipcpi> Well, mucti + krati maybe
21:48 < zipcpi> x1 is the physical embodiment of abstract concept x2
21:48 < GothAlice> A ha.
21:49 < zipcpi> Then, for the "between life and death", we could have zilkai + jbini
21:49  * GothAlice wishes that first lujvo was incorporated into vlasisku.  ;P
21:49 < zipcpi> Hah... I'm making them up right now
21:51 < GothAlice> The sense for "between life and death" I'm going for is difficult to accurately convey.  :/  It's a choice between the two, as polar opposites.  The avatar of these twin forces can give and take completely, but not much in-between.  I.e. it's not "power over life and death", but control over the choice between the two.
21:53 < GothAlice> (If you're alive, they can make you dead in a rather nasty manner.  If you're dead, they can return your soul from "literally wherever it is" to a body which will be recreated for you.  Mythology-wise, this means they're a cure for vampirism and other soul-related ailments… just in a very unpleasant manner.)
21:53 < GothAlice> This is for the Apex: The Evolved / People of the Thinking Plant thing.  ^_^
21:53 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/mutmaika'i
21:54 < GothAlice> Nice.  Totally bookmarking that dict.
21:56 < zipcpi> Hmm... may not need that second brivla... it's actually "balance", not "jbini" / no'e
21:59 < zipcpi> le mutmaika'i be lo si'o lanxe fa lo ka jmive kei ce lo ka morsi
21:59 < zipcpi> The embodiment of the concept of balance between living-ness and dead-ness
22:00  * GothAlice parses slowly.  ^_^;
22:05 < GothAlice> That's awesome.  Now, the follow-up is to create a pseudo-lujvo or pseudo-compound form to use as a noun.  The "simple Lojban" version of that, breaking grammar because names can do that, {set of} {livingness} {deadness} {/set} (type-of) {avatar/embodiment}
22:05  * GothAlice ponders.
22:06 < zipcpi> {lo}
22:06 < zipcpi> Turns any "verb" into a noun :p
22:06 < GothAlice> Well, this is an interestingly complex statement, and it's good to have a shorthand for names to improve conversational speed a bit.  ;)  (Naming full titles in formal style is a first introduction thing, but after that…)
22:07 < zipcpi> Well, does this thing have an actual name?
22:07 < zipcpi> If not you can just {goi} it to something :p
22:08 < GothAlice> Avatars in this universe typically are normal people who then gain possession of an object that "improves" them, so they do have names.  The role of being the avatar tends to dominate after picking up the object, though.
22:12 < GothAlice> Lomivmrokumutmaika’is.
22:13 < GothAlice> Loji'emrokumutmaika’is.
22:13 < GothAlice> Shorter wins.  ^_^
22:13 < zipcpi> Haha
22:13 < GothAlice> {.lomivmrokumutmaika’is.} (formatted correctly, and still quite a mouth-ful)
22:14 < zipcpi> Just call it la mivmroka'i
22:14 < GothAlice> Yeeah.
22:15 < GothAlice> Though it was my understanding such mashups insert (kind-of) between the gismu, thus living-kind-of-dead-kind-of-avatar?
22:15 < zipcpi> brivycme ftw
22:15 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/brivycme
22:15 < zipcpi> Well, lujvo tends not to follow the tanru-grouping doctrine strictly... no one wants to explicity say the kems and keps x.x
22:16 < GothAlice> Aaah, so like ordinary name forms, marked this way the "name" is almost abstract.
22:16 < zipcpi> Yep
22:16 < GothAlice> Nice.
22:16 < GothAlice> That's going to… shorten a fair number of names in the book.  XD
22:19 < GothAlice> First, extreme thanks for your assistance with that.  I have to run, though, I'm eating up cellular data while I've been waiting for the techs to fix whatever knocked my cable net out, and it's now after 0100.  ^_^;
22:19 < zipcpi> co'o
22:23 < rlpowell> If aynone wants to poke at CLL visual stuff:
22:23 < rlpowell> WRT https://github.com/lojban/cll/issues/149
22:24 < rlpowell> My current thoughts are at http://vrici.lojban.org/~rlpowell/media/public/cll_build/cll_prince.pdf
22:25 < rlpowell> As opposed to http://vrici.lojban.org/~rlpowell/media/public/cll_build-2015-06-20/cll_prince.pdf
22:30 < zipcpi> exp: lo broda cu brode jepoi brodi
22:30 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
22:30 < zipcpi> exp: lo broda cu brode po'oi brodi
22:30 < mensi> ([lo broda KU] [cu {brode <po'oi (¹CU [brodi VAU]¹) KUhOI>} VAU])
22:30 < zipcpi> Huh knows NOhOI
22:32 < zipcpi> rlpowell: Interesting; I don't know what to suggest though
22:33 < rlpowell> -_-
22:33 < rlpowell> Well, it's wrong/broken suddenly, so don't suggest anything.  :P
22:34 < zipcpi> Oh hey you also wrote that bridi cmaci thing? I have crazy ideas regarding it too
22:35 < zipcpi> Basically, bridi is one excellent replacement for the mekso cmavo space... my idea is to also allow use of character strings or even lo'u...le'u as a sort of "free grammar" defined outside normal Lojban grammar, then having special brivla to convert them
22:35 < zipcpi> Useful for converting such diverse stuff as dates, SMILES notation, Sideswap juggling notation
22:37 < zipcpi> Something like "x1 is the chemical described by jbo-SMILES notation x2"
22:38 < zipcpi> So freeing. You can redefine cmavo and brivla wholesale if necessary
22:39 < zipcpi> Thus no need to dedicate mekso cmavo... they could mean something more suitable for general usage, and also gain a mekso meaning when placed in {lo'u...le'u} and converted with the appropriate brivla
22:51 < rlpowell> There!
22:51 < rlpowell> zipcpi: You can look again if you want.
22:52 < zipcpi> {coi lojban.} should be {coi .lojban.}, even pre-dotside :p
22:52 < rlpowell> Nope, not pre-dotside.
22:53 < rlpowell> Hmm.  Maybe?
22:53 < rlpowell> Bah.  Don't remember.
22:53 < zipcpi> Just saying that that's a mistake, even by pre-dotside standards
22:53 < zipcpi> pre-dotside only allowed elision of that pause for {la/lai/doi}
22:53 < rlpowell> *nod*
22:53 < rlpowell> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/CLL,_aka_Reference_Grammar,_Errata please
22:56 < zipcpi> Hm one question
22:58 < zipcpi> Even though CLL probably shouldn't encode the "brivla-cmevla merge" proposal yet (if ever), I think it should have {cu} in {la .djan. cu klama}. This is because BCM or not, this elision of {cu} is confusing to beginners
22:58 < zipcpi> When they learn brivla can also be used in names, then they are liable to go {la zipcpi klama}
23:00 < zipcpi> Hm maybe I'll add a section to that page
23:02 < rlpowell> gleki: Please review the spacing in http://vrici.lojban.org/~rlpowell/media/public/cll_build/cll_prince.pdf
23:04 < gleki> any problems with these https related letters?
23:04 < mensi> gleki: cu'u la'o gy.zipcpi.gy.: Maybe allow {lilo'o} in altatufa? {me'olo'o} might be useful for "empty string" |
23:04 < mensi> 2015-07-20T02:39:54.499Z
23:05 < gleki> rlpowell: in some place looks fine but e.g. why some paragraphs dont start with an indented line e.g. on page 8?
23:05 < rlpowell> gleki: Everything after an exmalpe or table or whatever doen't indent.
23:05 < rlpowell> Because it's already clearly seperated frm the surrounding text.
23:05 < rlpowell> Also, may parapgrahps after examples continue the previous sentence.
23:05 < rlpowell> fg
23:06 < rlpowell> Whoops.
23:06 < gleki> hm
23:06 < gleki> looks somewhat strange.
23:06 < zipcpi> Huh does it actually have any examples of la CMEVLA BRIVLA?
23:06 < zipcpi> Can't seem to find any :p
23:06 < zipcpi> Though there are some dot-marking errors
23:06 < rlpowell> gleki: Example: "means that to reach the dog-biting" <-- search on that.
23:07 < rlpowell> If that's indented, it looks weird.
23:07 < rlpowell> gleki: I can put the indents back so you can see; I think it's better without.
23:07 < zipcpi> Ah found one. "la frank. sanli zu'a nu'i la djordj."
23:07 < gleki> rlpowell: maybe ban indenting only for paragraphs that start with a lowercase letter? because there should be some uniformity. some sentences after examples do start a new paragraph but they dont indent.
23:08 < gleki> rlpowell: or maybe as i suggested just indent all first lines of paragraphs but to  a small degree. retain indenting of examples as they are now
23:09 < gleki> zipcpi: report all errors and mistypes to https://github.com/lojban/cll/issues please
23:10 < zipcpi> I edited this page: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/CLL,_aka_Reference_Grammar,_Errata#Chapter_1
23:12 < rlpowell> 19-23:07 <       gleki> rlpowell: maybe ban indenting only for paragraphs that start with a lowercase letter? -- That's ... probably not impossible, but really really hard.
23:12 < rlpowell> 19-23:09 <       gleki> zipcpi: report all errors and mistypes to https://github.com/lojban/cll/issues please -- No, errors of the text go to the errata page, please.
23:13 < rlpowell> gleki: reload please.
23:15 < gleki> rlpowell:now let others share their opinion. i'd rather decreased indenting even more or maybe removed it completely. idk. how it was done originally in paper in the first edition?
23:16 < rlpowell> Way more indented.
23:17 < gleki> huh
23:17 < gleki> GothAlice: please use "mensi: doi selpahi this is a message to you" syntax to send delayed messages
23:23 < rlpowell> gleki: http://snag.gy/7Vpgz.jpg and http://snag.gy/VXLGI.jpg
23:23 < rlpowell> Note that the indent is something like 4 characters wide.
23:32 < rlpowell> gleki: Look at the "means that" para in the new version.
23:32 < rlpowell> I marked it specially so it doesn't indent, which is also the case in the original book (see above pics).
23:36 < zipcpi> mensi: doi GothAlice I also like the semantic-poetic assonance between {mutmaika'i} and {la mivmroka'i}, if all your avatars represent the balance between two opposing concepts.
23:36 < mensi> zipcpi: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.GothAlice.gy. di'a cusku da
23:39 < gleki> rlpowell: i see. so let's drop this subject until someone else complains. for now let's retain everything as it is now
23:40 < Roflknife34> mi pante . y How do I say next?
23:40 < zipcpi> za'umoi?
23:41 < Roflknife34> ki'e
23:41 < rlpowell> gleki: *nod*
23:41 < rlpowell> I'll post about it.
23:44 < gleki> depends on the meaning of "next"
23:44 < gleki> it can be {za'umai} as well
23:44 < zipcpi> Yeah kinda
23:45 < zipcpi> Or {bavlamji}
23:50 < Roflknife34> I meant it as in. "I want to be the next person to complain (as a joke)"
23:55 < gleki> mi djica lo ka za'umoi lo prenu poi pante
23:57 < gleki> ta'osai English sentence may sound shorter due to a lrage number of consonant clusters
23:57 < gleki> *large
23:58 < gleki> e.g. in last example ican find 7 consonant boundaries in English and only 2 in Lojban translation
23:59 < gleki> if we count each boundary as one syllable then Lojban translation will be one syllable shorter
--- Day changed Mon Jul 20 2015
00:03 < zipcpi> Yeah there is basically a trade-off known in the conlang community.
00:03 < zipcpi> Either you include phonemic complexity like tones, consonant clusters, or large phonemic inventory,
00:03 < zipcpi> Or you take more syllables to say something
00:03 < zipcpi> It's like a lump in the carpet :p
00:09 < gleki> I explained this problem http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Are_texts_in_Lojban_lengthy%3F
00:11  * nuzba @uitki: Are texts in Lojban lengthy?     http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Are_texts_in_Lojban_lengthy%3F [http://bit.ly/1HKmw3b]
00:11 < zipcpi> coi durka42
00:13 < durka42_> coi coi
00:13 < mensi> durka42_: cu'u la'o gy.zipcpi.gy.: I don't know why {li'ei} has four votes. It's a protest cmavo o.o |
00:13 < mensi> 2015-07-20T03:00:28.373Z
00:13 < mensi> durka42_: cu'u la'o gy.zipcpi.gy.: If you are one of the upvoters though I do thank you for joining my protest :p |
00:13 < mensi> 2015-07-20T03:04:02.264Z
00:13 < durka42_> ue
00:13 < gleki> en: upvote
00:13 < mensi> 5 da se tolcri: ma'udzau, adzau, co'udzau, dzaunlai, nildzau
00:14 < zipcpi> ue zo li'ei cu dzaunlai li vo
00:14 < gleki> where is this -dzau come from?
00:14 < zipcpi> zanru
00:14 < zipcpi> I made a pseudo-rafsi
00:19 < zipcpi> doi durka .i xu do viska la'au loi slari vanjba li'u pe la .e'ulojban.
00:19 < durka42> no I didn't see it
00:20 < durka42> ta'o can you explain this {ke po'o lo broda cu brode} thing?
00:20 < durka42> I think I saw Amnadya/selpa'i use it yesterday and I was quite confused
00:20 < zipcpi> zantufa: ke po'o lo broda cu brode
00:20 < zantufa> ([{ke po'o} {lo broda KU} KEhE] cu [brode VAU])
00:20 < durka42> ah I see
00:21 < zipcpi> This is an extension of {ke}, first developed to do stuff like this
00:21 < durka42> so how can we fix camxes-exp to parse this :)
00:21 < zipcpi> zantufa ke ko'a ce ko'i ke'e ce ko'o broda
00:21 < durka42> because zantufa has some other problematic features that disqualify it for general use
00:21 < zipcpi> zantufa: ke ko'a ce ko'i ke'e ce ko'o broda
00:21 < zantufa> ([{ke <ko'a (¹ce ko'i¹)> ke'e} {ce ko'o}] CU [broda VAU])
00:21 < zipcpi> Yeah I know T.T
00:22 < zipcpi> If I ever learn PEG might might adopt a pet parser myself. Can't decide if I should call it {maltufa} or {eultufa} :p (Don't worry, I'll probably keep two versions; one that's suitable for general use, and one that includes all the Eulojban madness)
00:22 < gleki> en: dudvota
00:22 < mensi> dudvota = x1 gives x2 (number) votes (upvotes) to x3 |>>> Positive number in x2 denotes an upvote, negative number a
00:22 < mensi> downvote. Use ca'onai dudvota for cancelling vote. |>>> gleki
00:23 < zipcpi> Did you just make that
00:23 < gleki> yes
00:23 < durka42> mu'i ma
00:23 < gleki> durka42: https://github.com/Ilmen-vodhr/ilmentufa/issues/118 so it's not zantufa's issue. it's our issue
00:24 < zipcpi> Erm, there needs to be a terbri for system too... well there is {ci'e} but I'm not sure how to formalize that
00:24 < gleki> durka42: so that one doesnt have to remember a bunch of brivla. one brivla would be enough. although for "vote score" i need to reread mekso
00:25 < gleki> zipcpi: you didnt provide any examples of such system. i think it's one of things that JVS should force
00:25 < zipcpi> la jbovlaste
00:25 < zipcpi> la flicku
00:25 < zipcpi> Whatever
00:25 < zipcpi> It's kinda an important concept
00:25 < zipcpi> Cause something must be keeping the vote score
00:26 < gleki> it's just a sum of all {lo se dudvota}
00:26 < zipcpi> I know I'm just saying that there is no "upvote/downvote" without a system to do it in
00:27 < gleki> i dont know what is that system unless you provide examples
00:27 < zipcpi> I told you
00:27 < zipcpi> la jbovlaste / la flicku
00:27 < durka42> gleki: it seems like guskant shows how to fix bug 118 :)
00:27 < gleki> alta: ke ui mi e do cu mo
00:27 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA ZOhE> <ke ui> <FA (¹mi [e do]¹)> KEhE} {cu <mo VAU>}])
00:27 < gleki> i think i already stole it into altatufa for sumti
00:28 < durka42> ueu
00:28 < zipcpi> ueu? :p
00:28 < durka42> zantufa: ke ui me e do cu mo
00:28 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
00:28 < durka42> zantufa: ke ui mi e do cu mo
00:28 < zantufa> ([{ke ui} {mi <e do>} KEhE] cu [mo VAU])
00:28 < zipcpi> ... you use an Eulojban cmavo that I didn't even define :p
00:28 < gleki> and im in the process of rewriting bridi part of that issue
00:33 < gleki> VUhU4 isn't in the list of links to CLL in vlasisku
00:34 < gleki> let's fix it at least for sutysisku
00:34 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Sour_Grapes You'll love it durka xo'o
00:34 < durka42> I saw it :)
00:34 < zipcpi> xu zbusufukai
00:35 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/BPFK_Section:_MEX_Operators#cmavo:_si.27i_.28VUhU4.29
00:35 < gleki> why {ky ky}?
00:36 < zipcpi> la'a se ci'asre
00:38 < gleki> exp: li si'i ky vei no bi'o ny
00:38 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] or [rR] but "n" found.
00:38 < gleki> off: li si'i ky vei no bi'o ny
00:38 < mensi> ([li {si'i <(¹ky BOI¹) (¹vei [{no BOI} {bi'o <ny BOI>}] VEhO¹)> KUhE} LOhO] VAU)
00:38 < zipcpi> Eulojban may be mostly satirical, but I am serious about unbanning -mz- :p
00:39 < zipcpi> FREE -MZ-
00:39 < gleki> that will break some things
00:39 < zipcpi> Like what
00:39 < gleki> off: li si'i ky vei no bi'o ro
00:39 < mensi> ([li {si'i <(¹ky BOI¹) (¹vei [{no BOI} {bi'o <ro BOI>}] VEhO¹)> KUhE} LOhO] VAU)
00:39 < gleki> off: li si'i ky du ma
00:39 < mensi> ([{li <si'i (¹ky BOI¹) KUhE> LOhO} CU] [du {ma VAU}])
00:40 < zipcpi> I mean the "what is not mandatory is forbidden" doctrine for lujvo is dead
00:40 < zipcpi> k: nonpa'a
00:40 < mensi> (CU [L:nonpa'a VAU])
00:40 < zipcpi> k: nonypa'a
00:40 < mensi> (CU [L:nonypa'a VAU])
00:40 < gleki> off: li si'i na'u se dudvota
00:40 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "d" found.
00:41 < zipcpi> So {memyze'a} won't break... all I'm suggesting is to accept {memze'a}
00:41 < gleki> off: li si'i mo'e lo se dudvota
00:41 < mensi> ([li {si'i <mo'e (¹lo [se dudvota] KU¹) TEhU> KUhE} LOhO] VAU)
00:41 < gleki> uanai
00:42 < gleki> well, it's {sumji ro se dudvota} of course. as for mekso idk
00:42 < gleki> zantufa: li si'i na'u se mo
00:42 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
00:42 < gleki> zantufa: li si'i mo'e lo se mo
00:42 < zantufa> ([li {si'i <mo'e (¹lo [se mo] KU¹) TEhU> KUhE} LOhO] VAU)
00:43 < zipcpi> Fair warning though, I *will* enter the direction gismu once they are unbanned lol
00:45 < zipcpi> Not sure about rafsi though...
00:47 < rlpowell> gleki: Posted a link to the latest spacing test version to the main list.
00:50 < gleki> let's see what they reply then
00:59 < zipcpi> durka42: Really though, {vanjbacau}?  :p
01:00 < durka42> ma nabmi
01:00 < zipcpi> I just find it funny
01:00 < durka42> it's supposed to be sort of a pun
01:00 < zipcpi> Right
01:00 < durka42> vanjbacau ke vanjbacpa nuntoi
01:01 < durka42> using {bo} instead of {ke} would make it more obvious
01:01  * zipcpi shrugs
01:01 < zipcpi> I do tend to avoid nonce-lujvo myself, but, that's the whole point of the exercise
01:02 < durka42> well -cau is an RDA :p
01:02 < durka42> not sure about -cpa sei zbusufukai
01:04 < zipcpi> :p
01:05 < durka42> zipcpi: what's that magic forethought prefix notation mekso cmavo?
01:05 < zipcpi> pe'o
01:05 < durka42> ah yes
01:05 < zipcpi> li'a pendo mi
01:06 < durka42> lo'e mekso cu nonseljmi mi
01:07 < gleki> RDA?
01:07 < zipcpi> "regular derivational affix"
01:07 < durka42> javni smuzba rafsi
01:09 < durka42> vlaste: datru (fapro)
01:09 < vlaste> zo datru gimkamsmikezypro zo tatru noi catni gismu .i zo datru gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
01:09 < durka42> vlaste: datro (fapro)
01:09 < vlaste> zo datro gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo datro gimkamsmikezypro zo datru noi cipra gismu
01:09 < durka42> .ei zo datru cu binxo zo datro
01:10 < zipcpi> Meh... {datru} is just {dreika}-lite
01:10 < gleki> e'u genai zo datru ginaizo datro cu se pilno
01:10 < durka42> .u'i
01:10 < durka42> neither of those are relevant
01:10 < durka42> en:dreika
01:10 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
01:11 < durka42> jbo:dreika
01:11 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
01:11 < durka42> lol
01:11 < durka42> so both of you said we should just use some other word that doesn't exist
01:12 < durka42> the problem is {datru} has significant usage
01:12 < zipcpi> {dreika} - x1 is a predicate created to solve problem x2 (default date system) in language x3 (default Lojban) with too many places x4, involving day x5, month x6, year x7, hour x8, minute x9, second x10, of calendar x11, objected by Lojbanist x12, and obsoleted by date system x13
01:12 < gleki> so dont shut it down
01:12 < durka42> but it clashes with an earlier gismu
01:13 < gleki> but it has significant usage :P
01:13 < zipcpi> That completely breaks cmavo set system x14 that is only designed to handle x15 (default 5) places
01:13 < durka42> I think we should just move the definition to {datro} and at {datru} write "dispreferred due to collision -- see {datro}"
01:13 < gleki> similarly you can redirect to {dreiko} or whatever
01:13 < durka42> rules of lojban >> significant usage >> nonexistent words
01:17 < durka42> mi muvgau fi zo datro
01:23 < durka42> JVS is so sloooow
01:24 < zipcpi> Hm {datru} is probably not downvotable though
01:25 < durka42> hum ight we don't want it out of the dictionary
01:25 < durka42> lol
01:25 < zipcpi> vlaste: dadru (fapro)
01:25 < vlaste> zo dadru gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo dadru gimkamsmikezypro zo datru noi cipra gismu
01:25 < durka42> just upvote {datro} more
01:25 < durka42> I thought of that but the root of {datru}/{datro} is that it has the same consonants as {detri}
01:25 < durka42> so {datro} is more appropriate
01:25 < zipcpi> No I'm just testing for ka gimpro :p
01:26 < durka42> la vlaste doesn't update that fast :)
01:26 < durka42> none of my recent manual updates have exploded though
01:26 < durka42> perhaps it's time to turn on automatic updates
01:26 < zipcpi> vlaste: famza (fapro)
01:26 < vlaste> zo famza gimkamsmikezypro zo fanza noi catni gismu .i zo famza gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
01:26 < durka42> it just takes 100% CPU for like 5 minutes to rebuild the index :/
01:26 < zipcpi> vlaste: bemza (fapro)
01:26 < vlaste> zo bemza gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo bemza gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
01:27 < durka42> those are morphologically bad, right?
01:27 < durka42> k: famza
01:27 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "f" found.
01:27 < zipcpi> Erm, yeah.
01:27 < zipcpi> -mz-
01:27 < zipcpi> I unbanned it from Eulojban though, so I made new gismu for compass directions
01:27 < gleki> dont use indices zo'o
01:28 < gleki> i da'i zo famza janli zo fanza
01:28 < durka42> better choose a new final consonant
01:29 < durka42> si vowel
01:29 < zipcpi> ii do pilno zo zo va'o tu'a lo nalseljva valsi .i lo xagji sofybakni ba darca
01:29 < durka42> what's the etymology?
01:29 < durka42> they don't seem to correspond to FAhA1
01:29 < zipcpi> FAhA2
01:30 < zipcpi> North, South, East, West
01:30 < durka42> that's FAhA1
01:30 < zipcpi> I intend for them to "replace" the official gismu
01:30 < zipcpi> Oh
01:30 < zipcpi> Really?
01:30 < durka42> vlaste: class:FAhA1
01:30 < vlaste> 4 results: be'a, du'a, ne'u, vu'a
01:30 < zipcpi> bemza, dumza, nemzu, vumza
01:31 < zipcpi> What's the problem, other than -mz- :p
01:31 < durka42> ah ok
01:31 < durka42> what's famza then?
01:31 < durka42> fa'a?
01:31 < zipcpi> Oh just a test
01:31 < zipcpi> Cause I know it "clashes" with fanza
01:31 < durka42> ah ok
01:33 < zipcpi> Well I didn't neglect ortho-Lojban. I also added {be'arna} etc.
01:38 < zipcpi> k: rirxrxrazdani
01:38 < mensi> (CU [Z:rirxrxrazdani VAU])
01:38 < zipcpi> k: rirxyrxrazdani
01:38 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "r" found.
01:38 < zipcpi> Oh
01:39 < zipcpi> Differs between syllabic /r/ and /y/, not /r/ and /yr/
01:39 < zipcpi> Thought Pierre might have found a new xazdmru
01:42 < rlpowell> I just made a change that *may* improve overall lojban.org performance.
01:42 < rlpowell> gleki: ^^
01:42 < rlpowell> durka42: Interested in your thoughts on my spacing test (see main mailing list post).
01:42 < rlpowell> afk chores.
01:55 < gleki> alta: ke broda gi'e brode ke'e gi'a brodi
01:55 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA ZOhE} {ke <(¹[broda NF] VAU¹) (¹gi'e CU [{brode NF} VAU] VAU¹)> ke'e VAU} {gi'a CU <(¹brodi NF¹) VAU> VAU}])
01:56 < gleki> looks like i finally incorporated guskant's fixes into alta
01:59 < durka42> rlpowell: je'e
01:59 < gleki> zipcpi: i can implement {li lo'o mo} but not {li mo}
02:01 < zipcpi> Oh right cause of cu li
02:04 < vlaste> sei ca ca'o ningau lo pe mi sorcu
02:12 < durka42> vlaste: datru
02:12 < vlaste> datru = x1 (event) is dated/pertaining to day/occurring on day x2 of month x3 of year x4 in calendar x5
02:12 < durka42> vlaste: datro
02:12 < vlaste> datro = x1 (event) is dated/pertaining to day/occurring on day x2 of month x3 of year x4 in calendar x5
02:13 < durka42> vlaste: datru FULLTEXTSEARCH
02:13 < vlaste> datru = x1 (event) is dated/pertaining to day/occurring on day x2 of month x3 of year x4 in calendar x5
02:13 < durka42> hmm that didn't work
02:13 < durka42> vlaste: DATRU
02:13 < vlaste> datro = x1 (event) is dated/pertaining to day/occurring on day x2 of month x3 of year x4 in calendar x5
02:13 < durka42> heh
02:13 < durka42> vlaste: DATRO
02:13 < vlaste> datru = x1 (event) is dated/pertaining to day/occurring on day x2 of month x3 of year x4 in calendar x5
02:14 < zipcpi> vlaste: *azd*
02:14 < vlaste> xazdo = x1 reflects Asiatic culture/nationality/geography in aspect x2.
02:14 < zipcpi> vlaste: *myz*
02:14 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/%2Amyz%2A
02:14 < zipcpi> Wait wut
02:14 < durka42> the wildcard search is really finisky
02:14 < durka42> finicky*
02:15 < durka42> ['jemyzda', "kamyzi'e", 'kumyzda', "memyze'a", 'samyzamsmacu', 'samyzetro', 'samyzilkei', 'samyzilkeikei', 'samyzva', 'sumyzmico']
02:17 < zipcpi> samyzilkeikei lol
02:18 < durka42> vlaste: samyzilkeikei
02:18 < vlaste> samyzilkeikei = x1 plays with video game x2.
02:18 < durka42> .u'i wtf
02:18 < durka42> vlaste: samyzilkeikei (finti)
02:18 < vlaste> samyzilkeikei (finti) = Wuzzy
02:18 < durka42> of course
02:18 < durka42> that was my guess
02:18 < durka42> lo jvapre
02:18 < zipcpi> Bloated lujvo
02:18 < durka42> iesai
02:25 < durka42> py! [entry for entry in database.root.entries.keys() if 'myz' in entry]
02:25 < durka42> vlaste: py! [entry for entry in database.root.entries.keys() if 'myz' in entry]
02:25 < vlaste> No REPL for you!
02:26 < zipcpi> What's that... an injection attempt?
02:26 < durka42> yes
02:26 < durka42> it's supposed to allow me to do it :p
02:27 < durka42> it works in private chat
02:27 < zipcpi> DROP TABLE jbovla
02:28 < zipcpi> vlaste: bu'a'a'); DROP TABLE words;--
02:28 < zipcpi> lol
02:28 < durka42> phew closed it just in time :p
02:28 < zipcpi> lol
02:28 < durka42> vlaste: coi
02:28 < vlaste> coi = vocative: greetings/hello.
02:29 < durka42> ah
02:29 < durka42> I'm dumb
02:29 < durka42> vlaste: coi
02:29 < vlaste> coi = vocative: greetings/hello.
02:29 < durka42> vlaste: py! [entry for entry in database.root.entries.keys() if 'myz' in entry]
02:29 < vlaste> ['jemyzda', "kamyzi'e", 'kumyzda', "memyze'a", 'samyzamsmacu', 'samyzetro', 'samyzilkei', 'samyzilkeikei', 'samyzva', 'sumyzmico']
02:30 < durka43> vlaste: py! [entry for entry in database.root.entries.keys() if 'myz' in entry]
02:30 < vlaste> No REPL for you!
02:30 < durka42> ui
02:30 < zipcpi> How does it detect?
02:30 < durka42> username whitelist
02:30 < zipcpi> What if some zbusufukai prenu /nick durka42
02:31  * zipcpi whistles innocently
02:31 < durka42> durka42 is registered
02:31 < zipcpi> lol
02:31 < durka42> also it's a VPN in japan, do whatever you want .u'i
02:31 < durka42> VPS*
02:38 < gleki> zantufa: abuza'ure'u mo
02:38 < zantufa> ([{a bu} BOI] CU [{<za'u BOI> re'u} mo] VAU)
02:38 < gleki> zantufa: li abu mo
02:38 < zantufa> ([li {<a bu> BOI} LOhO] CU [mo VAU])
02:38 < gleki> zantufa: lipa  abu mo
02:38 < zantufa> ([{li <pa BOI> LOhO} {a bu} BOI] CU [mo VAU])
02:38 < gleki> zantufa: li abu pa mo
02:38 < zantufa> ([{li <(¹a bu¹) BOI> LOhO} {pa BOI} mo KU] VAU)
02:38 < gleki> zantufa: li abu pa mo cu mo
02:38 < zantufa> ([{li <(¹a bu¹) BOI> LOhO} {pa BOI} mo KU] cu [mo VAU])
02:39 < gleki> alta: li lo'o mo
02:39 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li lo'o>} {mo VAU}])
02:40 < gleki> jbo: po'e
02:40 < mensi> po'e = [GOI] poi ke'a se jinzi le ka ce'u se steci le ka ce'u srana |>>> poi; jinzi; steci; srana |>>>
02:40 < mensi> xorxes
02:40 < gleki> can't {po'e} be used instead of {po'o}?
02:42 < durka42> in what context?
02:44 < gleki> in any
02:44 < gleki> {po'e} is about steci
02:44 < gleki> {po'o} too
02:52 < durka42> I mean they are different selma'o
02:53 < durka42> mi prami do po'o -- how are you going to rephrase this with {po'e}?
02:53 < gleki> yes, different grammar since some hate UI grammar for po'o
02:54 < durka42> what should it be instead
02:54 < durka42> and you didn't answer my question :)
02:59 < gleki> im just thinking how one is supposed to convert from {do se steci lo kase prami mi} to {mi prami do po'o} in general
02:59 < durka42> mm
03:00 < durka42> mi prami do po'o => broda lo ka mi prami ce'u => do se steci lo ka mi prami ce'u
03:00 < durka42> when it marks non-sumti not sure, need to consider more
03:01 < gleki> i dont understand converting at the first step
03:01 < gleki> you lost {do}
03:01 < durka42> I replaced the marked sumti {do po'o} with {ce'u}
03:02 < durka42> {broda} was {se steci be fa do}
03:02 < gleki> btw robin sent me a copy of jvs.sql
03:03 < durka42> a current database dump?
03:03 < durka42> co'o mi'e ba xrukla
03:03 < Compu-Celebi> jbovlaste uses SQL?
03:06 < gleki> yes, a postgres dump of it with user info deleted
03:06 < Compu-Celebi> Define "postgres."
03:07 < gleki> just sql
03:08 < Compu-Celebi> I do not comprehend your response.
03:11 < xeizlif> Compu-Celebi: postgres is an SQL server; a postgres dump is a dump of its database, presumably either in its own format or as a big list of SQL statements that would create the same databases
03:15 < Compu-Celebi> Why is it called "postgres"?
03:17 < dutchie> "The name refers to the project's origins as a "post-Ingres" database, being a development from University Ingres DBMS (Ingres being an acronym for INteractive Graphics Retrieval System)"
03:17 < dutchie> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PostgreSQL
03:23 < ctefaho> what is the new gismu that means "tolcanci"?
03:23 < Compu-Celebi> It seems that PostgreSQL is a system that one or more servers use, rather than being a server itself.
03:28 < dutchie> "server" is an overloaded term for a piece of software servicing requests and the computer that it runs on
03:48 < durka42> mi nau xrukla
03:49 < Compu-Celebi> go'i ma
03:49 < durka42> ti poi se .irci
03:50 < Compu-Celebi> Oops, I actually needed to use the third place.  The second place is for the [i]destination[/i], not the origin.
03:50 < Compu-Celebi> I would have said {go'i fi ma}.
03:50 < durka42> I got the meaning anyway
03:51 < durka42> I mainly announced my return because I thought la gleki might have left me a message, which would only show up if I said something
03:51 < durka42> but he didn't
03:51 < durka42> za'a
03:52 < Compu-Celebi> Yet, your answer was that you returned to here.
03:52 < durka42> oh I see
03:53 < durka42> you meant to ask where I returned from
03:53 < durka42> mi xrukla fi lo nu dormijysai
03:53 < Compu-Celebi> je'a go'i
03:55 < Compu-Celebi> A {nu dormijysai} is an event of being one or more meals, not a meal ingestion event.
03:56 < Compu-Celebi> s/meal/lunch/
03:56 < fenki> Compu-Celebi meant to say: A {nu dormijysai} is an event of being one or more lunchs, not a meal ingestion event.
03:56 < Compu-Celebi> s/lunchs/lunches/
03:56 < fenki> Compu-Celebi meant to say: A {nu dormijysai} is an event of being one or more lunches, not a meal ingestion event.
03:57 < durka42> lo puzi nu dormijysai cu nu lo vrici cidja cu dormijysai fi'o citka mi
03:57 < durka42> mi noroi xusra lo sedu'u ba'e mi dormijysai
03:57 < gleki> jbo: tolcanci
03:57 < Compu-Celebi> I intended to say, "A {nu dormijysai} is an event of being one or more lunches, not a lunch ingestion event."
03:57 < gleki> durka42: lo du'u
03:58 < mensi> [< to'e canci ≈ To'e canci*] 8 da se tolcri: solnuntolcanci, berti, cerni, donri, murse, nicte, snanu,
03:58 < mensi> stuna
03:59 < gleki> en:/full canci
03:59 < mensi> 14 da se tolcri: canci, selcanci, snocanci, solnuncanci, solnuntolcanci, tercanci, tolcanci, cliva, ganse, lebna, selkra,
03:59 < mensi> tolyli'a, vimcu, zgana
03:59 < gleki> not invented yet
04:00 < gleki> vlaste: tcusa (gimka)
04:00 < vlaste> zo tcusa gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo tcusa gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
04:02 < Compu-Celebi> I did not say "an event of [i]you[/i] being one or more lunches."
04:02 < gleki> vlaste: tcuse (gimka)
04:02 < vlaste> zo tcuse gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo tcuse gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
04:03 < gleki> i propose {tcuse} from "chu1xian4"
04:04 < durka42> for what?
04:04 < gleki> for tolcanci
04:04 < Compu-Celebi> Is "gimkamsmikezypro" intended to mean "antonym"?
04:07 < gleki> en: antonym
04:07 < mensi> 11 da se tolcri: selsmudukti, brabra, caibra, capcni, cmacai, cmacma, kancni, nurcni, seicni, smudukti,
04:07 < mensi> tcebra
04:11 < durka42> vlaste: gimkamsmikezypro
04:11 < vlaste> gimkamsmikezypro = x1; (word/quote; probably gismu) conflicts with x2 (word/text; probably gismu) according to rules x3
04:12 < durka42> it refers to the rules in CLL for gismu that would sound too similar
04:13 < gleki> en: gimkamzmikezypro
04:13 < mensi> [< gismu ka zmiku kei fapro ≈ Root word being automatic end abstraction oppose] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se
04:13 < mensi> tolcri
04:13 < mensi> gimkamyzmikezypro[16905], gi'urkamyzmikezypro[18494], gimkamyzmikezyfapro[18964], gimkamyzmikykezypro[19035],
04:13 < mensi> gismykamyzmikezypro[19035], ...
04:13 < gleki> en: gimkamsmikezypro
04:13 < mensi> gimkamsmikezypro [< gismu ka simsa kei fapro ≈ Root word being similar end abstraction oppose] = x1  (word/quote;
04:13 < mensi> probably gismu) conflicts with x2 (word/text; probably gismu) according to rules x3 |>>> Neither x1 nor x2 need be "
04:13 < mensi> official and accepted". |>>> krtisfranks
04:15 < durka42> lo se cusku be la mensi ta'e fegli .u'i
04:15 < gleki> en:gimkamsmikezypro
04:15 < mensi> gimkamsmikezypro [< gismu ka simsa kei fapro ≈ Root word being similar end abstraction oppose] = x1  (word/quote;
04:15 < mensi> probably gismu) conflicts with x2 (word/text; probably gismu) according to rules
04:15 < mensi> x3
04:15 < gleki> zmadu xu
04:17 < durka42> ie
04:17 < gleki> Aistlaţervièllîmļ, for example, is the term for “a situation where one lets a normally unavailable opportunity pass by because it is not seen as being the optimal instance or form of that opportunity, despite the likelihood that such an optimal instance/form of the opportunity will likely never come (e.g., letting a bottle of expensive wine go past its prime because one can never decide when would be t
04:17 < gleki> he optimal time to drink it; or letting slip by an opportunity for true love because one hopes someone even ‘better’ may come along.)”
04:17 < gleki> ithkuil: Aistlaţervièllîmļ
04:17 < ithkuil> error
04:18 < gleki> http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-worlds-smallest-language-has-only-100-words-and-you-can-say-almost-anything-2015-7
04:18 < gleki> probably from  ithkuil-2004
04:21 < Compu-Celebi> Ah, it certainly seems to be an Ithkuil word.
05:46 < Amnadya> We still don't have a word for "scene" in the sense of "a part of a play, book, film etc in which events happen in the same place or period of time"
05:47 < Compu-Celebi> Does one exist for "act" in the theatrical sense?
05:47 < gleki> se fanbu
05:48 < Compu-Celebi> en: fanbu
05:48 < Amnadya> "act" might be draci pagbu or draci kantu
05:48 < Compu-Celebi> en:fanbu
05:48 < durka42> Amnadya: seems like we just need a word for "a play/book/film/etc"
05:48 < durka42> then scene can be brodypau
05:48 < Amnadya> I just don't know if pagbu is enough, because some books have parts, chapters, and scenes.
05:48 < gleki> fanbu described here http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ELG._Subjunctives,_imaginary_situations
05:49 < gleki> Amnadya: pagbu lo se cukta enai lo cukta
05:49 < Amnadya> na banzu
05:50 < gleki> pagbu lo tcini poi lo se cukta cu skicu pe'a vau sei d[3~nei zei ge'enmo
05:51 < Amnadya> lo si'o cukta na je lo si'o lisri cu vajni
05:52 < gleki> xu lo se cukta ka'e lisri
05:53 < Amnadya> la'a go'i .i ku'i lo skina ku ji'a co'e .i li'o .i ja'o na sarcu fa lo nu zo cukta pagbu lo se finti valsi
05:53 < gleki> en: /full larcu
05:55 < Compu-Celebi> en:ge'enmo
05:59 < durka42> Amnadya: so like a lispau be bu'u lo pamei
05:59 < Amnadya> mi ba'o jmina fi la nabmyrta'imacusku .i la'a ba finti lo zi'evla
06:06 < Compu-Celebi> Oh, I erroneously believed that {pe'a} preceded, not followed, to what it applied.
06:13 < gleki> la vrici ca masno
06:21 < gleki> i masno i ie masno
06:26 < gleki> en:/full larcu
06:27 < mensi> 15 da se tolcri: larcu, pleplolarcu, artefresko, cnadakfu, finti, lardai, larpra, me'andi, mi'irlarfi'a, pirlarfi'i,
06:27 < mensi> skalpeli, stati, tamtigypre, terxra, zbasu
06:27 < mensi`i> 15 da se tolcri: larcu, pleplolarcu, artefresko, cnadakfu, finti, lardai, larpra, me'andi, mi'irlarfi'a, pirlarfi'i,
06:27 < mensi`i> skalpeli, stati, tamtigypre, terxra, zbasu
06:30 < gleki> ua i JVS cu masno
06:32 < durka42> ma'a'a'a'asno
06:36 < gleki> en: larseku
06:36 < mensi> 2 da se tolcri: ensaio, mlauca
06:36 < gleki> je'e
06:36 < gleki> i pu plixau brivla
06:37 < gleki> i cati JVA cu tcetce zmadu la vrici lo ka masno
06:37 < Compu-Celebi> To what does "JVA" refer?
06:39 < gleki> JVS
06:39 < gleki> i mi pu srera ciska
06:41 < gleki> jbo: larseku
06:41 < Compu-Celebi> .i je'e
06:41 < mensi> larseku = x1 prosa ja pemci ja skina ja draci x2 fi x3 fo x4 .i va'i x1 larselsku x3 noi se pi'o vo'a tavla x4 fi x2
06:41 < mensi> zi'o ku'o x4 |>>> prosa pemci skina draci larselsku |>>> zozeizeizeizeifaho
06:43 < gleki> exp: se fa do cu mo
06:44 < mensi> ([{se fa} do] [cu {mo VAU}])
06:44 < gleki> je'e
06:44 < gleki> i ma smuni vau u'i
06:54 < durka42> ba'anai la tsani pu finti lo cizra smui
06:54 < durka42> si smuni
07:04 < niftg> la spagetufa cu slilu klama ti ta soi vo'e
07:06 < gleki> coi zo soi
07:06 < cliva> .ei mi co'u favgau lo go'i se pi'o lo ralju fukpi
07:07 < cliva> ie ze'a lo masti be li za'u na se pilno
07:07 < niftg> mi'e dai slabu ja purci me zo soi
07:14 < gleki> alta: na'e mo mo
07:14 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <na'e mo> mo} VAU])
07:14 < gleki> alta: mo nai mo
07:14 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <mo nai> mo} VAU])
07:15 < gleki> alta: na'e mo nai mo
07:15 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
07:15 < gleki> intentional
07:15 < gleki> however
07:15 < gleki> alta: na'e se mo nai mo
07:15 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <na'e (¹se [mo nai]¹)> mo} VAU])
07:15 < gleki> again intentional
07:23 < durka42> whyyyyy
07:23 < durka42> don't we have enough rules...
07:24 < Amnadya> I don't see the problem with {na'e [mo nai]}.
07:24 < Amnadya> NAI should be allowed anywhere.
07:35 < gleki> Amnadya: da'i ma smuni
07:36 < Amnadya> xu do jimpe fi lu mo nai li'u
07:36 < Amnadya> .i broda nai .i na'e broda .i na'e broda nai .i na'e na'e broda
07:37 < Amnadya> .i na nibli lo du ba se pilno
07:37 < Amnadya> .i ku'i .ei cumki fa lo nu pilno .i na sarcu fa lo nu fanta
07:38 < gleki> mu'a lu to'e mo nai li'u i ma smuni i xu lu to'e na'e mo li'u ji lu na'e to'e mo li'u
07:48 < Compu-Celebi> I cannot decipher {lo du ba se pilno}, which seems to be ungrammatical.
07:48 < gleki> yes, some people here use {du} instead of {du'u} and vice versa
07:49 < Compu-Celebi> Why would they do this?
07:50 < gleki> ti'e because du'u is two syllables and that's too many
07:51 < dutchie> zbusufukai zo'o
07:51 < ctefaho> it is part of some cmavo reshuffling, see http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ce_ki_tau_jau
07:53 < ctefaho> me I personally propose ja for ja'a:)
08:02 < dutchie> .u'i mi ganse je nelci lo ka cmene la sutysisku
08:02 < dutchie> (not sure if {cmene} is really the best translation for the html <title>)
08:03 < ctefaho> lo title sisi
08:04 < durka42> gimkamsmikezypro zo titla
08:28 < GothAlice> .ui coi
08:28 < mensi> GothAlice: cu'u la'o gy.zipcpi.gy.: I also like the semantic-poetic assonance between {mutmaika'i} and {la mivmroka'i},
08:28 < mensi> if all your avatars represent the balance between two opposing concepts. | 2015-07-20T06:36:19.267Z and {la mivmroka'i},
08:28 < mensi> if all your avatars represent the balance between two opposing concepts. | 2015-07-20T06:36:19.
08:28 < mensi> 267Z
08:44 < durka42> coi la .alis.
08:49 < durka42> jbo:mo'oi
08:49 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
08:49 < ldlework> I really love mo'oi
08:54 < durka42> I'd love to know its expansion
08:54 < durka42> because zipcpi is claiming on the mriste that it fixes a problem and I don't see how it does
08:54  * durka42 looks up selpahi's original article
08:56 < gleki> en: mo'oi
08:56 < mensi> mo'oi = [LE] interrogative gadri: "which" |>>> Roughly equivalent to ma noi, but doesn't start a new bridi. |>>>
08:56 < mensi> spheniscine
08:57 < gleki> wait but {ma noi} does start a new bridi
08:57 < latro`a_> exactly
08:57 < ldlework> That's what he's saying
08:57 < latro`a_> mo'oi broda = ma noi broda ku'o
08:57 < durka42> yeah ok
08:57 < ldlework> It allows you to more easilly relativize the question it self
08:58 < latro`a_> eh, I should put a ku on the left
08:58 < gleki> why is mo'oi needed then
08:58 < gleki> oh
08:58 < gleki> i misread
08:59 < gleki> it's le:mo'oi::zo'e:ma
08:59 < ldlework> do djica mo'oi plise poi zunle
09:00 < latro`a_> that's a little weird
09:00 < latro`a_> how is that different from {do djica mo'oi plise je zunle}
09:00 < durka42> so he definitely is using it wrong on the mriste :p
09:00 < ldlework> latro`a_: I have a bridi and you don't?
09:01 < durka42> {mo'oi plise poi zunle} seems like you're asking me a question and then asserting something about my answer
09:01 < durka42> what if I answer with a plise that doesn't satisfy {zunle} :)
09:01 < ldlework> I don't see why
09:01 < ldlework> durka42: why would that be a problem?
09:01 < latro`a_> it seems like there should be a semantic distinction between {noi ... poi} and {noi ... je ...}
09:01 < durka42> mo'oi plise poi zunle => ma noi plise ku'o zi'e poi zunle ?
09:02 < ldlework> I don't see a problem when a listener answers with a value that the speaker didn't ask for, as a problem with the speaker's speech
09:02 < durka42> ^ honest question, not an attack
09:02 < durka42> je'e
09:04 < gleki> exp: ma noi plise poi zunle
09:04 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "z" found.
09:05 < Amnadya> {plise je zunle} has a non-sensical x2, that's one difference.
09:06 < latro`a_> fair, I guess, but it's the same question as "what's the difference between {ma noi plise gi'e zunle cu ...} and {ma noi plise zi'e poi zunle cu ...}
09:06 < Amnadya> {lo broda poi brode} == {lo broda je poi'i ke'a brode}
09:06 < latro`a_> "
09:06 < ldlework> latro`a_: is it important for there to be a distinction?
09:07 < latro`a_> maybe there isn't one
09:07 < latro`a_> that's part of my question
09:07 < ldlework> latro`a_: what if multiple relativizations are simply conjunctions?
09:07 < ldlework> ah ok
09:07 < latro`a_> also, I disagree with that, amnadya
09:07 < Amnadya> {ma noi plise gi'e zunle} makes more sense than the one with {zi'e poi}
09:07 < latro`a_> the left side is instantiated prior to being relativized
09:07 < latro`a_> the right side is not
09:08 < Amnadya> What do you mean?
09:08 < latro`a_> in other words, there's some brodas we're talking about, I'm restricting to the ones that brode; vs. the right side where there are some things that both broda and brode that we are talking about
09:08 < Amnadya> Ah, no.
09:09 < Amnadya> You are talking about {lo broda *ku* poi brode}.
09:09 < latro`a_> my understanding was that with no inner quantifier there is no difference
09:09 < ldlework> I think that when you go all the way down, its just conjunctions with differences in emphasis.
09:09 < ldlework> IE iterative constraint or realtizivation
09:09 < Amnadya> There is a big difference, though.
09:09 < GothAlice> mensi: doi zipcpi Not all avatars are polar like that; polar avatars are a classification of them.  (A "class" a la abominations, aberrations, outsiders, deep ones, the shadow, etc. all having distinct nuance, such as point of origin, power source, and weaknesses, despite all of those being "extradimensional" in general.)
09:09 < mensi> GothAlice: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.zipcpi.gy. di'a cusku da
09:09 < Amnadya> (with poi anyway)
09:10 < ldlework> But it isn't a logical one
09:10 < durka42> wait I don't know the difference without quantifiers
09:10 < latro`a_> there is actually a logical difference with an inner quantifier
09:10 < durka42> with {po'o} I see the difference
09:10 < Amnadya> You do know!
09:10 < durka42> but with {poi}... not sure
09:10 < ldlework> There is a logical difference between poi and noi? /me raises eyebrow
09:10 < latro`a_> {lo ci broda poi brode} builds a group of three brodas all of which brode
09:10 < latro`a_> {lo ci broda ku poi brode} takes a group of three brodas and takes out some that brode; the result might be fewer than three thingsn
09:11 < durka42> wait let's let Amnadya speak, I want to know what's the difference without quantification :)
09:11 < ldlework> ehh
09:11 < latro`a_> with noi, you have the same effect in emphasis space, but you can't exclude anything in the second case, so the referential aspects are the same
09:11  * durka42 agrees with latro`a_ 
09:11 < Ilmen> coi
09:11 < durka42> coi
09:12 < Amnadya> Yes, what latro'a said there is correct.
09:12 < ldlework> Where is that defined?
09:12 < ldlework> lo broda ku poi brode
09:12 < ldlework> The broda that brode's
09:12 < latro`a_> it's really where the first one is defined
09:12 < ldlework> But with quantification, boom it works different
09:12 < latro`a_> the second one works the way you expect
09:12 < ldlework> seems bad
09:12 < Amnadya> That follows from {SUMTI poi broda} == {lo me SUMTI je poi'i ke'a broda}
09:13 < latro`a_> yes, the second one is what you would expect
09:13 < durka42> ldlework: it's the same really
09:13 < latro`a_> the first one is the weird one
09:13 < Amnadya> That's the whole reason why {ma poi} is useless.
09:13 < latro`a_> I'd say "is a hack" rather than "is useless"
09:13 < ldlework> So where is it defined?
09:13 < ldlework> Where can I read about it
09:13 < Amnadya> BPFK.
09:13 < durka42> in the BPFK pages I think
09:13 < ldlework> I'm not too familiar with those, can someone link me?
09:14 < Amnadya> latro`a_: Did you read the blog article about {ma poi} ?
09:14 < durka42> start at mw.lojban.org/BPFK+Sections
09:14 < Amnadya> Because that shows why ma poi is broken.
09:14 < latro`a_> which one is that?
09:14 < Amnadya> http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/whichwhat-a-new-gadri
09:14 < latro`a_> again, I agree that it's broken when taken strictly, but I disagree that it doesn't achieve its goals in practice
09:14 < Amnadya> Because we misunderstood it all this time.
09:14 < durka42> ah so {lo broda ku poi brode} => {lo me broda poi brode} ?
09:14 < Amnadya> It's time to move on.
09:15 < durka42> er, => {lo me lo broda ku poi broda} ?
09:15 < zipcpi> AHAHAHAHA Oh man... old {zo'au} is in KOhA
09:15 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.GothAlice.gy.: Not all avatars are polar like that; polar avatars are a classification of them.  (A
09:15 < mensi> "class" a la abominations, aberrations, outsiders, deep ones, the shadow, etc. all having distinct nuance, such as point
09:15 < mensi> of origin, power source, and weaknesses, despite all of those being "extradimensional" in general.) |
09:15 < mensi> 2015-07-20T16:09:48.143Z
09:16 < zipcpi> That's rich... not much better than UI X3
09:16 < Amnadya> .u'i
09:16 < durka42> eh wat? I see a zo'au in LA
09:16 < Amnadya> durka42: Yes
09:16 < durka42> so the difference is that the reference has already happened
09:16 < zipcpi> Erm... yeah someone else stole zo'au
09:17 < zipcpi> ... for a purpose that's only useful pre-BCM T.T
09:17 < latro`a_> I'm not really seeing the difference between selpahi's (4) and (5)
09:17 < zipcpi> And technically one could use lo'u...le'u anyway
09:17 < latro`a_> in practice
09:17 < latro`a_> I see the syntax of course
09:17 < zipcpi> Ah... not sure what we're discussing
09:17 < durka42> don't worry you came in late
09:18 < latro`a_> we were talking about {ma poi} and also about {lo broda poi} (with no {ku})
09:18 < zipcpi> K
09:18 < durka42> I mentioned {mo'oi} because you tried to use it on the mriste for something that it doesn't actually do, and now somehow we're talking about the difference between {lo broda poi brode} and {lo broda ku poi brode}
09:18 < zipcpi> It doesn't work? o.o
09:18 < Amnadya> Any sumti such that the chosen clothes are among its referents is a truthful answer to (5). In other words, it asks the wrong question.
09:19 < durka42> zipcpi: on the mriste you said {mo'oi pa <broda>} i.e. {mo'oi <sumti>} which... isn't a thing
09:19 < Amnadya> Mo'oi is in LE
09:19 < zipcpi> Grammatically mo'oi is in LE
09:19 < Amnadya> LE pa broda is a thing
09:19 < zipcpi> So it works
09:19 < durka42> ohh
09:19 < durka42> I didn't get it
09:20 < durka42> okay that might actually work
09:20 < durka42> maybe
09:20 < durka42> have to look at the expansion of LE PA :)
09:20 < gleki> Amnadya: fau lo nu na pilno lo cnino cmavo vau ma drata tadji lo nu pilno lo srana be lo ma poi li'u
09:20 < Amnadya> ma poi'i ...
09:21 < durka42> or just manoi?
09:21 < Amnadya> I don't like ma noi, but it's okay with me.
09:22 < Amnadya> It moves the restriction into a presupposition.
09:22 < durka42> yeah
09:22 < zipcpi> ma neu / zo'o
09:22 < gleki> Amnadya: do na'e nelci ki'u lo nu lo famyma'o ibo xu
09:23 < Amnadya> ki'u tu'a zo noi je ki'u lo nu bridi
09:23  * durka42 notes that gleki's new favorite construction "ibo UI" breaks under guskant's mabla change to {.i}
09:24 < gleki> mi gleua li xo'e
09:24 < gleki> Amnadya: xu zo noi na mulno mapti
09:24 < Amnadya> mi pu zi ciksi ru'e
09:24 < Ilmen> pe'i na
09:24 < Amnadya> .i ka'e darlu lo du'u mapti .i ku'i mi zmanei lo drata
09:25 < Amnadya> .i pe'i na dunli lo jai se djica
09:25 < Ilmen> coi
09:25 < Amnadya> coi la menli'i
09:26 < Ilmen> .i xu su da na te tugni
09:26 < niftg> me'enli'i
09:26 < Amnadya> .i xu su da ba'e ja'a te tugni
09:26 < Ilmen> sa'e je cu srana zo mo'oi
09:26 < Amnadya> na djuno
09:27 < gleki> xu ca su'o da lo ro casnu cu simxu lo ka tugni
09:27 < Amnadya> zo'o ru'e nu'o fasnu
09:27 < gleki> i sa'e xu ca su'o da pu'iku lo ro casnu cu simxu lo ka tugni
09:27 < durka42> .u'i ie
09:27 < Ilmen> ja'o casnu te zu'e lo nu djuno lo du xu kau tugni
09:27 < Amnadya> .i ja lo ro casnu cu memkai li pa
09:27 < gleki> i ie ma'oi ca'a  vau ei
09:28 < durka42> co'o ei
09:28 < Ilmen> zo'o ru'e
09:28 < Amnadya> co'o
09:28 < Ilmen> co'o do
09:28 < Amnadya> co'o to'e mi
09:28 < Amnadya> zo'o
09:28 < Ilmen> .a'o zandotfri
09:29 < gleki> i ta'o ca lo cabdei je pare'uku mi jungau lo munje fi la altatufa
09:29 < Ilmen> ŭi carvi ca lo cabdei vi
09:29 < gleki> carmi xu carvi
09:30 < Ilmen> carmi pe'a gi'e ku'i ditcma
09:30 < gleki> camcarvi caircarvi
09:30 < gleki> i uidai co'a dunra bu'u do vau zo'o
09:30 < Amnadya> ca lo prulamdei vi carvi .i ku'i ze'i go'i .i to'e ki'u nai pluka sai
09:31 < gleki> alta: pluka sai
09:31 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <pluka sai> VAU}])
09:31 < zipcpi> ... dang it man, Malay has changed... at least colloquial Malay... then again I was never very familiar with colloquial Malay
09:31 < Amnadya> Those damn tinkerers.
09:31 < zipcpi> Exactly
09:31 < gleki> i ta'o ma'oi zo cu ei klesi ma'oi ro'a vau la'a
09:32 < gleki> zipcpi: hire Wuzzy
09:32 < zipcpi> lol
09:32 < Ilmen> Nice to hear. It means Malay is still alive.
09:32 < zipcpi> Malay even has a BPFK :p
09:32 < Ilmen> zo'o ru'e
09:33 < Ilmen> ro rarbau cu voi lo du ki co'u cenba cu xlali be ki nuzba
09:34 < zipcpi> ie
09:34 < gleki> alta: ro'a
09:34 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
09:34 < Amnadya> xu lo runbau cu ckaji lo simsa
09:34 < gleki> no idea how to fix bare {ro'a}
09:35 < gleki> into {ge'ero'a} probably
09:35 < zipcpi> Kamu ini siapa -> Kau ni siapa -> Ko ni sapa
09:35 < zipcpi> Never seen the latter in my entire life
09:35 < zipcpi> But saw it in an advert
09:35 < gleki> but bare {nai} is much more problematic
09:35 < ldlework> coi zipcpi
09:35 < zipcpi> coi
09:36 < zipcpi> Of course being an advert it's probably highly colloquial and not standard spelling
09:36 < gleki> zipcpi: do xabju ma poi si noi gugde
09:36 < zipcpi> lo mejgu'e
09:36 < Amnadya> mejgu'e
09:37 < gleki> zipcpi: xu do se bangu yyy fe la singlic
09:37 < Ilmen> .u'e .i xu ca ti ge xabju lo mejgu'e gi cinmo lo ka na certu tau lo mejbau
09:37 < gleki> i ku'i naku la'a la singlic i lo drata cmene
09:37 < zipcpi> ru'e .i zo'oi Manglish
09:37 < zipcpi> simsa zo malglico u'i
09:38 < gleki> i ie la manglic
09:38 < gleki> i banmu'isu
09:39 < gleki> is there a question word for NAI?
09:39 < Ilmen> xu mixre lo baxso bangu joi lo glibau
09:39 < Ilmen> pei
09:39 < Ilmen> y
09:39 < gleki> selmaho:nai
09:39 < mensi> .i lu nai li'u cmavo zo'oi NAI
09:39 < mensi> http://lojban.github.io/cll/14/3/
09:39 < mensi> http://lojban.github.io/cll/15/7/
09:39 < mensi> cmavo: ja'ai, nai
09:39 < gleki> nu'o
09:39 < zipcpi> mixre lo baxsybau joi lo glibau joi lo so'i jugbaukle
09:39 < Ilmen> je'e
09:40 < Ilmen> .i xu tonga bangu
09:40 < gleki> zipcpi: xu la manglic ne ji'a cu sutra farvi gi'e sutra cenba
09:41 < zipcpi> .y. cau'a .i lo'e fu'ivla ta'e tonga co'e
09:42 < Amnadya> jbo:cuxpei
09:42 < mensi> [< cuxna pensi ≈ Cuxna* pensi*] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
09:42 < mensi> cuxpei[5867], cu'arpei[7456], cuxpensi[7937], cuxnypei[7997], cu'arpensi[9526], ...
09:42 < gleki> jbo: cau'a
09:42 < mensi> gleua = x1 mo'e x2 va'ei se vajni x3 .i ra'a x2 li no so'aroi du li no'ai
09:42 < Amnadya> ..
09:42 < gleki> xu zo cau'a dunli lu ja'a xi xo'e li'u
09:43 < Ilmen> en: cuxtoi
09:43 < mensi> cuxtoi [< cuxna troci ≈ Choose try] = x1 is trying to choose which of x2 (plural) to be in relation x3 with |>>>
09:43 < mensi> Ilmen
09:43 < Ilmen> en: cuxselnandu
09:43 < mensi> cuxselnandu [< cuxna se nandu ≈ Choose 2nd conversion hard] = x1 hesitates on which of x2 (plural) to choose for doing
09:43 < mensi> x3 (relation) with it/them |>>> See also cuxtoi, cuxna. |>>> Ilmen
09:43 < Ilmen> .e'i jmina zo cuxpei
09:43 < zipcpi> mi no'e se slabu le cnino pe la manglic ja lo mejbau .i mi cu ru'esai jikca lo'e se mejbau
09:44 < Ilmen> .i xu naku lo xabju be lo mejgu'e cu se mejbau
09:44 < Ilmen> .i kucli sa'u
09:44 < zipcpi> mi xabju .iku'i mi ralju se bangu lo glibau
09:44 < gleki> velkemjvajvokepcmi-izing of rafsi should start from most stable concepts like e.g. time/space. e.g. we can start from cmalu/barda, gapru/cnita
09:45 < Ilmen> .i xu so'i xabju be lo mejgu'e cu se glibau
09:45 < zipcpi> so'a me lo mi lanzu cu se glibau
09:46 < zipcpi> ja'a
09:47 < Ilmen> cizra tcini .i mi pu zukpei lo ka toltce co cilre fi lo baxsybau .i .a'o na palcau .u'i
09:47 < zipcpi> su'o da se glibau .i su'o de se mejbau .i su'o di se jugbau .i su'o daxivo se banje'u'e
09:48 < zipcpi> .i me'au lo simsa
09:48 < Ilmen> .i'e melbi nu pilno zo me'au
09:50 < zipcpi> o'a
09:50 < zipcpi> .i la cliva cu ctuca
09:50 < Ilmen> .i xu lo mejgu'e vecnu .e lo simsa cu ta'e se glibau si'a
09:50 < Amnadya> .i mi pu zukpei lo ka tadni lo bindo no'u la .ba'asas.
09:51 < Ilmen> ra'o .i ti'e simsa ju simsytce lo mejbau
09:51 < zipcpi> su'o
09:51 < Amnadya> ti'e frili sai
09:51 < Ilmen> je'e la zipcpi
09:52 < gleki> mi pu djica lo ka tadni lo kadno glico i y bazisaibo mi snada u'i
09:52 < gleki> i snada lo ka co'a tadni gi'e mo'u tadni
09:53 < Ilmen> sei dai sadycni
09:53 < gleki> alta: mi pe mo
09:53 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <mi (¹pe GEhU¹)>} {CU <mo VAU>}])
09:53 < zipcpi> lo mejbau zo'u zo'oi lah cnima'o .iku'i jai nandu fai lo ka se fanva
09:53 < gleki> "pe GEhU" because {pe do'e zo'e ge'u} would be really silly
09:53 < zipcpi> xy~'y simsa ru'e zo uai
09:54 < zipcpi> ja zo ko'oi
09:55 < zipcpi> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manglish#The_.22Lah.22_word
09:55 < zipcpi> u'i
09:56 < gleki> 61 open issues, 64 closed. seems like im starting to win.
09:56 < Ilmen> pe'i mi pu za ju zu tcidu doi la zipcpi
09:56 < gleki> a bit like Chinese "ba"
09:56 < Ilmen> .i'u ru'e
09:57 < zipcpi> "maluation" - embarrassment, from Malay "malu" + English "-ation".
09:57 < zipcpi> Never heard that one
09:57 < gleki> maybe "lah" is like {o'udai}
09:57 < Amnadya> pu za ju pu zu
09:58 < Ilmen> .oi je'e
09:58 < gleki> exp: pu za ju pu zu
09:58 < mensi> ([{<pu za> <ju (¹pu zu¹)>} KU] VAU)
09:58 < zipcpi> "Die/Finish/Gone/Habis/Mampus/Mampui/Sei/See/GG/Pok kai/" - generic exclamations to indicate "trouble", used like the English "dead" or "dead end" - "sei" is usually pronounced as its Cantonese equivalent, "die". (E.g. Today he die because of that loan shark (Today, he is in trouble because of the loan sharks. The word "die" does not mean to die literally)).
09:58 < zipcpi> lol "GG"
09:58 < zipcpi> Probably from "good game"
09:59 < Ilmen> .u'i
09:59 < gleki> it's all needs to be first studied in Chinese dialects
10:00 < Amnadya> mi pu zi jijnu (to fau lo nu va'i na pensi toi) finti zo zongata noi brivla panra zo zo'a (to mi sanji tau zo zonkai toi)
10:00 < gleki> en: zonkai
10:00 < mensi> zonkai [< zo'a ckaji ≈ Tangential to quality] = x1 is alongside of x2 |>>> Predicate form of zo'a; it means whatever
10:00 < mensi> zo'a means. See also zo'a. |>>> Ilmen
10:01 < zipcpi> u'i
10:01 < gleki> mi se mansa zo zonkai
10:01 < zipcpi> la ilmen cu nelci ra'oi -kai-
10:01 < Amnadya> mi djica lo nu lo brivla voksna cu panra lo cmavo voksna
10:02 < Amnadya> zo'a ze'o zo'i
10:02 < Ilmen> mi finti zo zonkai mu'i no drata be ri xi ni'u .e lo nu faumlu fa lo nu no da mapti brivo
10:02 < Amnadya> .i lo rafsi na sidju
10:02 < Ilmen> .i .e'a sai finti lo matmau ja mlemau
10:03 < Ilmen> .i lo velski pe zo zonkai ku ji'a na'e sidju
10:03 < Ilmen> :p
10:03 < zipcpi> zo zomza zo'o
10:03 < Amnadya> lol
10:03 < Amnadya> simsa lo juknyxarju
10:03 < Amnadya> en:juknyxarju
10:03 < mensi> juknyxarju [< jukni xarju ≈ Jukni* pig] = x1 does whatever a spider pig does.
10:03 < dutchie> u'i
10:04 < zipcpi> vlaste: zomzo (fapro)
10:04 < vlaste> zo zomzo gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo zomzo gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
10:04 < zipcpi> vlaste: zomza (fapro)
10:04 < vlaste> zo zomza gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo zomza gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
10:04 < Ilmen> la'a zo zombi simsyrai
10:04 < zipcpi> melbi
10:04 < zipcpi> ko'oi me'o myzy zifre
10:06 < gleki> somewhere in Amazonia Lojbanists say "uma gata zongata" - a cat walks along.
10:06 < Amnadya> zo'igve ze'ogve zo'agve
10:07 < Amnadya> ( __ + ragve )
10:08 < Ilmen> .a'u
10:08 < zipcpi> ku'i da'i zo zomzi gimpro zo zomza
10:08 < Amnadya> xu smisimdu'e
10:09 < zipcpi> zomzyzomza
10:09 < Amnadya> .i li'a na smisimzma lo cmavo panra
10:09 < zipcpi> amzamzamzamzamzamza
10:09 < Ilmen> en: zomzi
10:09 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
10:09 < Ilmen> .i'u nai cai
10:09 < zipcpi> .y. selpau me'o myzy
10:10 < zipcpi> .i ja'ebo na se javdi
10:10 < zipcpi> si javni
10:10 < Amnadya> .e'e pei mi jmina lo mi zi'evla
10:10 < Amnadya> .i da'i su melmau cu zasti
10:10 < zipcpi> mi na pante
10:11 < zipcpi> da'i zo zomzi cu dunli lu xo'i zo'i li'u
10:12 < zipcpi> doi ilmen
10:12 < Amnadya> zo li'armi ne do cu plixau .i la selckiku pu finti zo va'arga lo simsa
10:12 < Ilmen> je'e zy
10:13 < zipcpi> k: bemza
10:13 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "b" found.
10:13 < Amnadya> spagetufa: amza
10:13 < spagetufa> (CU [.àmza VAU])
10:13 < Amnadya> xe'e'e
10:13 < zipcpi> u'i
10:13 < gleki> ue
10:14 < gleki> spagetufa: bemza
10:14 < spagetufa> (CU [bèmza VAU])
10:14 < Amnadya> la spagetufa cu jinga
10:14 < gleki> i ei la altatufa cu zukte da
10:14 < zipcpi> spagetufa: memze'a
10:14 < spagetufa> (CU [mem/zè'a VAU])
10:15 < zipcpi> spagetufa: samzamsmacu
10:15 < spagetufa> (CU [sam/zam/smàcu VAU])
10:15 < zipcpi> ui~~~~~
10:15 < zipcpi> ba'adai'i la uuzit cu pante
10:16 < zipcpi> spagetufa: pacxlu
10:16 < spagetufa> (CU [pàc/xlu VAU])
10:16 < zipcpi> .y.
10:16 < gleki> alta: xu na bamzu
10:16 < mensi> (NIhO [I xu] [FA ZOhE] [CU {na banzu} VAU])
10:16 < gleki> :P
10:16 < gleki> alta:kibcu'a
10:16 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <kibycu'a VAU>}])
10:17 < zipcpi> spagetufa: kibcu'a
10:17 < spagetufa> (CU [kiby/cù'a VAU])
10:17 < Amnadya> lo gentufa cu jamna se'e
10:17 < zipcpi> xy'y
10:17 < gleki> zu'ainmo
10:18 < gleki> alta: 6٦۶६૬੬৬୬౬೬൬௬༦၆๖៦໖
10:18 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "a" found.
10:18 < zipcpi> alta: samzamsmacu
10:18 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <sanzamsmacu VAU>}])
10:18 < zipcpi> .y.
10:18 < gleki> alta: 6٦۶६૬੬৬୬౬೬൬௬༦၆๖៦໖ da
10:18 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <(¹xa [xa xa xa xa xa xa xa xa xa xa xa xa xa xa xa xa]¹) BOI> da} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
10:18 < gleki> spagetufa: 6٦۶६૬੬৬୬౬೬൬௬༦၆๖៦໖ da
10:18 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?!\u0020] or end of input but "x" found.
10:19 < zipcpi> alta: memze'a
10:19 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <menze'a VAU>}])
10:19 < zipcpi> pe'i zo memyze'a cu mapti semau
10:21 < zipcpi> le spagetufa cu to'e za'e banmrulygau keji'a me'o cy xy
10:22 < Amnadya> un-banhammers je'e je'e
10:22 < zipcpi> :p
10:23 < zipcpi> spagetufa: axca
10:23 < spagetufa> (CU [.àxca VAU])
10:23 < zipcpi> spagetufa: axka
10:23 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?!\u0020] or end of input but "a" found.
10:24 < zipcpi> xa'a'a'a'a suda dukse lo ka zbusufukai kei sy
10:25 < gleki> https://github.com/holtzermann17/toki-pona-emoji/blob/master/word_list.org
10:28 < gleki> https://github.com/holtzermann17/toki-pona-emoji/blob/master/sample_phrases.org
10:29 < gleki> Thank you	:smile:
10:29 < gleki> (Response)	:smile:
10:29 < zipcpi> u'i
10:32 < gleki> alta: lo lojbo ne po'o mo
10:32 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <lo (¹lojbo [ne po'o] GEhU¹) KU>} {CU <mo VAU>}])
10:33 < gleki> still doesnt work for names
10:33 < zipcpi> alta: la djan klama
10:33 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <la (¹djan klama¹) KU>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
10:33 < zipcpi> Oh cause it'd be part of the LA clause
10:34 < Amnadya> Isn't {la} already irregular with regards to relative phrases
10:34 < zipcpi> Yeah that's why I made {voi'i}
10:35 < zipcpi> Which... sorta clashes with new-voi lol
10:35 < Amnadya> Afterall, people seem to say that {la poi brode ku'o broda} has the relative clause as part of the name, even though CLL says that {lo poi brode ku'o broda} is the same as {lo broda ku poi brode} (I'm not taking sides with this statement)
10:36 < zipcpi> Hm
10:36 < zipcpi> Regardless it's an ugly solution for relative-clause titles
10:37 < zipcpi> That's why I wanted to wring one last kosmu out of voi for that
10:37 < zipcpi> But nope, new-voi, so I had to make {voi'i}
10:38 < Amnadya> (BPFK repeats CLL's view with regards to relative clause placements)
10:38 < Amnadya> (But BPFK is free to change their view in face of strong arguments!)
10:38 < Amnadya> tl;dr {la} is an exception.
10:39 < Amnadya> However, I'm not sure everyone would agree that {lo mi gerku} is {lo gerku ku pe mi}
10:39 < Amnadya> But that's CLL and BPFK.
10:40 < zipcpi> Hm yes, seems problematic if one wanted to be pedantic about {pe}
10:40 < gleki> ei la noi mu'a me BPFK jatna su'o da cu stidi
10:40 < gleki> sa
10:40 < gleki> ei la noi mu'a me BPFK jatna vau su'o da cu stidi
10:40 < zipcpi> Not to mention it breaks old po and po'e
10:40 < Amnadya> Never heard of those. :P
10:41 < durka42> lojbanists never want to be pedantic, don't worry about it
10:41 < zipcpi> I did actually sometimes use {po} to mean {be fi'o ponse}, but I don't really ever use {po'e}
10:41 < Amnadya> Another fegli option: {lo mi gerku} != {lo pe mi gerku}
10:42 < zipcpi> Regardless I added {pesai} and {pecai} to JVS just as a "drop-in" replacement with a cleaned-up meaning. Not sure if they'd be used often
10:42 < Amnadya> {po} and {po'e} are so rare that nobody should complain about having to use brivla for them instead
10:43  * zipcpi shrugs
10:43 < Amnadya> Not to mention {po'e} is {be}.
10:43 < zipcpi> Most of the time
10:43 < durka42> {be do'e}
10:43 < zipcpi> pe = bedo'e
10:43 < gleki> y mi pu pilno zo po ca lo ka traduki zo'ei lo linji pe la mupli
10:44 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/pesai
10:44 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/pecai?bg=1;langidarg=2
10:44 < Amnadya> pesai = poi ke'a co'e sai
10:44 < zipcpi> Heh
10:46 < zipcpi> I just added those on a lark, based on what people tell me {po} and {po'e} might mean
10:46 < zipcpi> May have some poetic use
10:46  * Amnadya de'a jundi
10:46 < zipcpi> And doesn't take up any cmavo space, so it's zabna that way
10:47 < zipcpi> So is like, use it, or don't; doesn't really matter
10:49 < gleki> a new function in mensi
10:49 < gleki> mensi: aigne
10:49 < mensi> CommonSenseError: Expected normal word but Curtis found.
10:49 < zipcpi> lol
10:49 < zipcpi> mensi: toi'e
10:49 < mensi> xu lo nu casnu la'e di'u cu raktu do
10:49 < gleki> works only for aigne
10:49 < zipcpi> OK
10:50 < gleki> finti: gleki
10:50 < mensi> 8738 da se tolcri: admine, advarka, adverbu, aftobuso, aftostopi, agmasto, aigne, aitco, aitxero, akrobat, akti, albatro,
10:50 < mensi> albuma, aldeia, alga, algoritma, alkanse, alna, altare, altrici, ambigu'o, amble, ambuci, ambulance, amfite'atro, ampute,
10:50 < mensi> anci, ankabuta, ankla, anli, ...
10:51 < gleki> due to some error im now the author of it
10:51 < zipcpi> ca'edai
10:59 < zipcpi> But yes there is a potential problem with the {lo broda pe mi} vs the {lo broda ku pe mi} distinction; intentionality isn't obvious, and closing a sumti can be difficult if NU is involved
11:04 < durka42> zantufa: ke lo broda ke'e pe mi
11:04 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [uU] .onai [yY] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
11:04 < zipcpi> spagetufa: ke lo broda ke'e pe mi
11:04 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [uU] but "i" found.
11:04 < zipcpi> spagetufa: ke po'o lo broda cu brode
11:04 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
11:05 < zipcpi> ... something that Spagetufa didn't fix yet :p
11:07 < zipcpi> Well there's always i'au. But Curtis kinda broke i'au for UI lol
11:13 < zipcpi> I mean it could still work via deep magic. But it means that it won't be useful for attaching UI to sumti
11:21 < phma> If I want to say "you can also get there by Amtrak" with "klama", does Amtrak go in the route place or the vehicle place?
11:21 < zipcpi> Ugh I can never remember the five-place brivla T.T
11:22 < Amnadya> Is this a joke question?
11:22 < phma> no, this is serious. I'm translating the jbonunsla announcement.
11:23 < Amnadya> Then I'd tend to go with the vehicle place.
11:23 < Amnadya> Or are the rails themselves called Amtrak as well?
11:24 < phma> Sounds good. Amtrak doesn't have exclusive use of the rails. I was once on an Amtrak train that had to wait for the Tropicana train.
11:24 < Amnadya> Or reword with pilno la .amtrak.
11:28  * nuzba @garydale: Keyboard Shortcuts for Novelists:   Or you could just mash the keys together in a fit of anxious rage ... http://bit.ly/1IfnCtx #lojban [http://bit.ly/1fhJHKL]
11:29 < Amnadya> Suspicious lojban hashtag
11:29 < phma> mi platu le nu zvati lo berpau be la .delyuer. ze'a  lo djedi be li so'u pu'o lo jbonunsla
11:29 < phma> is that correct use of "pu'o"?
11:29 < zipcpi> exp: le pa lu'i lo tcati ce lo ckafi
11:29 < mensi> ([le {<pa BOI> <lu'i (¹[lo tcati KU] [ce {lo ckafi KU}]¹) LUhU>} KU] VAU)
11:30 < Amnadya> I don't think so. I think {pu} is better there
11:30 < Amnadya> Or say {ca lo nu lo jbonunsla pu'o fasnu}
11:31 < phma> If I put "pu" there I could be in Delaware any time before jbonunsla. I'm leaving my sister's on Friday and will go straight to jbonunsla, unless there's someone to pick up.
11:31 < Amnadya> Experimental {se pu'o} could work, but nobody ever says that
11:32 < phma> {pu'o} is a tense marker, not a proper preposition. You can't se-convert tense markers.
11:32 < Amnadya> Not under CLL, no. But you can if tenses are merged with BAI.
11:33 < Amnadya> The main point however is that {pu'o} there doesn't mean what you want
11:33 < phma> What does {pu'o lo jbonunsla} mean?
11:33 < Amnadya> It means that at the time of jbonunsla, the main bridi is about to happen.
11:34 < phma> Then do I want {ba'o}?
11:34 < Amnadya> {ba'o} works, then it'd mean that at the time of jbonunsla you will have stayed at your sister's for a while.
11:34 < Amnadya> People usually avoid {ba'o} and {pu'o} as sumtcita because they are so confusing.
11:36 < Amnadya> What about {pu lo jbonunsla zi}?
11:36 < Amnadya> It's a short time before jbonunsla
11:36 < phma> How about " ba'o lo co'a jbonunsla "?
11:36 < zipcpi> Aaaaaaaaa
11:37 < zipcpi> ii~~~~~~~
11:37 < zipcpi> sko'opu nu kalsa
11:37 < Amnadya> I think it would be much clearer not to use {ba'o} or {pu'o}. {ca lo nu pu'o} or {ca lo cfapru be lo jbonunsla} work
11:38 < phma> sko'opu ki'a
11:38 < zipcpi> "scope"
11:38 < Amnadya> There seems to be disagreement about {pu'o}'s meaning though. You are using it as "going to happen soon", while some use it as "it's going to happen, but not necessarily soon"
11:38 < phma> a silly scope?
11:38 < zipcpi> It's not in JVS because we don't know what the place structure should be T.T
11:39 < zipcpi> Nah, scope as in logical scope
11:41 < Amnadya> You could also use {prula'i}.
11:42 < Amnadya> Your stay precedes your going to jbonunsla
11:42 < zipcpi> Actually it's probably not the fault of scope, but of {ba'o} and {pu'o} lol
11:43 < Amnadya> They are the most mindbreaking tags.
11:43 < zipcpi> broda ba'o ko'a = ba'o broda ca ko'a ?
11:43 < Amnadya> I have yet to find a common use case
11:44 < Amnadya> ca ko'a ba'o broda
11:44 < zipcpi> Mm
11:44 < gleki> alta: ke lo broda ke'e pe mi
11:44 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA ZOhE> <ke (¹FA [lo broda KU]¹) ke'e>} {CU <FASNU (¹FA [LO {NU <(²FA ZOhE²) (²CU [COhE VAU]²)> KEI} KU] [pe {DOhE mi} GEhU]¹) VAU>}])
11:44 < gleki> unexpected parse, isnt it?
11:44 < Amnadya> ke fa oO
11:45 < gleki> alta: ke gau lo broda ke'e pe mi
11:45 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA ZOhE> <ke (¹gau [lo broda KU]¹) ke'e>} {CU <FASNU (¹FA [LO {NU <(²FA ZOhE²) (²CU [COhE VAU]²)> KEI} KU] [pe {DOhE mi} GEhU]¹) VAU>}])
11:45 < Amnadya> zantufa: fa ke lo broda
11:45 < zantufa> ([fa {ke <lo broda KU> KEhE}] VAU)
11:45 < Amnadya> zantufa: ke fa lo broda
11:45 < zantufa> ([ke {fa <lo broda KU>} KEhE] VAU)
11:45 < Amnadya> zantufa: fa ke fa lo broda
11:45 < zantufa> ([{fa KU} {ke <fa (¹lo broda KU¹)> KEhE}] VAU)
11:45 < Amnadya> je'e
11:46 < Amnadya> .i la'a plixau
11:46 < gleki> zantufa: ke lo broda cu mo
11:46 < zantufa> ([ke {lo broda KU} KEhE] cu [mo VAU])
11:46 < gleki> y
11:47 < Amnadya> Anyone confused about ZAhO might want to read this: selpahi.de/ZAHO_Explanation.txt
11:47 < gleki> ei ma'a jijnu ma pe lu ke lo broda cu mo li'u
11:47 < gleki> i xu lu fa ke lo broda li'u
11:47 < durka42> ZAhO or #ZAhO?
11:47 < durka42> :p
11:47 < Amnadya> ZAhO vs ZA'O
11:48 < ecraven> coi ro do :)
11:48 < Amnadya> coi
11:49 < Amnadya> .i doi la gleki mi jijnu tu'a lu fa ke lo broda li'u
11:49 < Amnadya> .i do ma jijnu doi drata
11:51 < zipcpi> ie lu fa ke lo broda li'u
11:51 < gleki> Amnadya: mi na jijnu i mi kucli mi kakne lo ka stika la altatufa
11:52 < gleki> xorxe's formula for TAG ko'a is easy to understand although i prefer not {ca} but {fau=fi'o fanbu} there.
11:54 < gleki> oh no 68 issues opened, 63 closed. im losing this battle...
11:55 < zipcpi> Issues where
11:55 < gleki> https://github.com/lagleki/glekitufa/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue
12:05 < zipcpi> exp lo broda cu brode zo'u ko'a
12:05 < zipcpi> exp: lo broda cu brode zo'u ko'a
12:05 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
12:05 < zipcpi> I wonder if we can overload zo'u.... then again that doesnt' mean we *should*
12:06 < zipcpi> Might be semantically confusing
12:08 < zipcpi> Ugh my little thread is out of control... how many topics are there?
12:08 < zipcpi> NU tu'e...tu'u
12:08 < zipcpi> tu'e...tu'u + TAG
12:09 < zipcpi> Logical connectives...
12:09 < zipcpi> mo'oi
12:09 < zipcpi> Gah
12:10 < zipcpi> ja'a mi mutmaika'i lo ka kalsa kei va'o lo jbobau
12:16 < durka42> you started it :p
12:16 < durka42> "by the way" questions are always a bad idea
12:16 < durka42> they end up becoming the main topic
12:16 < zipcpi> :p
12:25 < zipcpi> spagetufa: lo nu tu'e broda .i brode tu'u
12:25 < spagetufa> ([FA {lo <nu (¹tu'e [{CU <bròda VAU>} {.i <CU (²bròde VAU²)>}] tu'u¹) KEI> KU}] VAU)
12:25 < zipcpi> spagetufa: tu'e broda .i brode tu'u ca ko'a
12:25 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,], [lL], [mM], [nN], [rR] or [xX] but "k" found.
12:25 < zipcpi> spagetufa: ca ko'a zo'u tu'e broda .i brode
12:25 < spagetufa> ([{ca ko'a} zo'u] [tu'e {<CU (¹bròda VAU¹)> <.i (¹CU [bròde VAU]¹)>} TU'U])
12:25 < zipcpi> So it's just the post-next thing that has a problem
12:26 < zipcpi> spagetufa: tu'e broda .i brode tu'u sei ca ko'a
12:26 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,], [lL], [mM], [nN], [rR] or [xX] but "k" found.
12:26 < zipcpi> spagetufa: tu'e broda .i brode tu'u sei ca ko'a cu no'a
12:26 < spagetufa> (tu'e [{CU <bròda VAU>} {.i <CU (¹bròde VAU¹)>}] tu'u [sei {<ca ko'a> cu} no'a SE'U])
12:27 < zipcpi> alta: tu'e broda .i brode tu'u sei ca ko'a cu no'a
12:27 < mensi> (NIhO [I {tu'e <NIhO (¹I [FA ZOhE] [CU {broda VAU}]¹) (¹i [FA ZOhE] [CU {brode VAU}]¹)> <tu'u (¹sei [ca ko'a] cu¹) no'a SEhU>}])
12:27 < zipcpi> alta: tu'e broda .i brode tu'u sei ca ko'a
12:27 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [oO] but "a" found.
12:27  * zipcpi presses the buzzer
12:29 < zipcpi> Hm we *could* just allow {sei} to work like {zo'au}?
12:32 < Amnadya> Don't think so.
12:33 < zipcpi> Well, elidable selbri, altatufa staile :p
12:33 < zipcpi> But maybe that's mabla
12:33 < durka42> that way lies dragons si ambiguity
12:33 < zipcpi> lol
12:34 < Amnadya> I'm copying my handwritten plot notes to my computer right now, and there is a word I don't remember what I wanted it to mean
12:34 < zipcpi> ambigudrakono
12:34 < Amnadya> {carmirai}
12:34 < Amnadya> I'm pretty sure it has something to do with carmi and traji
12:34 < Amnadya> .o'i drakono
12:36 < zipcpi> Someone stole zo'au though, though I'm not sure JVS-zo'au is useful
12:37 < zipcpi> Well, has no use with BCM. Pre-BCM there might be an argument, but there's always lo'u...le'u
12:42 < zipcpi> ei mi cliva co'o
12:48  * nuzba @dogu_beer: しぇるにしょい。 #ohayo #Lojban [http://bit.ly/1TMIIBs]
12:54 < niftg> za'a da cernicoitu'itsku
13:27 < ecraven> is there a collection of lojban resources in .epub format anywhere?
13:28 < Amnadya> I don't know of any.
13:29 < Amnadya> PDFs are easier to come by
13:30 < ecraven> Amnadya: indeed, but less handy on ebooks, they'd need to be layouted for a5, not a4 :(
13:30 < Amnadya> Yeah
13:31 < durka42> I think the CLL can be built as an epub but I dunno if that code has bitrotted
13:31 < durka42> it's in the list of build targets
13:31 < ecraven> I just found cll 1.0 as an epub, I'll start with that :)
13:31 < ecraven> thank you !
13:33 < durka42> bleh
13:33 < durka42> we need to get some more modern resources available as epubs then :)
13:36 < durka42> are there any good ways to convert wiki pages to epubs
13:36 < durka42> the wave lessons, say...
13:37 < durka42> mensi: doi gleki what do you think about instaling this? https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:EPubExport
13:37 < mensi> durka42: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.gleki.gy. di'a cusku da
13:38 < ldlework> Write everything in ReST
13:38 < durka42> or docbook!
13:38 < ldlework> Import into export formats such as mw and pdf, html, etc
13:39 < durka42> markdown is where it's at
13:39 < ldlework> lol markdown is terrible
13:39 < ldlework> docbook: way too verbose
13:39 < ldlework> markdown: not even a standard
13:39 < ldlework> rest: has a standard and exports to everything
13:40 < ldlework> human readable, and typeable
13:40  * Amnadya uses paint for everything.
13:40 < ldlework> The problem is there is no rst->docbook
13:40 < ldlework> and docbook is required for publishing
13:40 < ldlework> But only the CLL requires that
13:40 < durka42> if you can import from mw to rst and then export to epub... then we got a solution :p
13:40 < ldlework> if publishing can be forgiven, nothing beats rst, imo
13:41 < ldlework> durka42: there isn't
13:41 < ldlework> That's the problem with using app-specific markdowns as first source
13:42 < durka42> agreed
13:46  * nuzba @464161niftg: lojban › baby words, but general relevance: dai-like cmavo https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/-6IIW2fn0mo/discussion / 自分は未だ読んでゐないものの [http://bit.ly/1HMa3fk]
17:18  * nuzba @usagipi314: lojban lo logji banguをなんとなく転写してみた    なんだろう...めっちゃ創作文字っぽい [http://bit.ly/1JtmP2x]
17:20  * nuzba @usagipi314: @usagipi314: lojban lo logji banguをなんとなく転写してみた    なんだろう...ちょっと無理があるけどめっちゃ創作文字っぽい http://t.co/JRIfvqu4ff [http://bit.ly/1JtmZHk]
19:13 < noncomcinse> camxes: ia nai cai
19:13 < camxes> (ia [nai cai])
19:13 < noncomcinse> camxes: ia ru'e
19:13 < camxes> (ia ru'e)
19:14 < noncomcinse> camxes: ia ru'e nai
19:14 < camxes> (ia [ru'e nai])
19:14 < noncomcinse> camxes: ia ru'e cai
19:14 < camxes> (ia [ru'e cai])
19:14 < noncomcinse> camxes: ia nai ru'e cai
19:14 < camxes> (ia [nai {ru'e cai}])
19:19 < noncomcinse> ki'e .camxes.
20:05 < _mukti_> ui mi mo'u jorne lo tcana poi se cmene zo lojban
21:40 < zipcpi> Crap who voted up cmene-quote-zo'au while I was away? I just added postnex-zo'au
21:46 < zipcpi> lol now I have two votes to their two. The fight is on
21:55 < zipcpi> Challenge: Translate Fermat's Last Theorem (not the proof, of course, only the statement)
21:56 < zipcpi> Without VUhU D:
22:01 < zipcpi> exp: a'y jo'u by jo'u cy vu'o poi cmima lu'i ro kacna'u
22:01 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "k" found.
22:01 < zipcpi> ...
22:02 < zipcpi> exp: a'y
22:02 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ], [0123456789], [eE] or [oO] but "a" found.
22:02 < zipcpi> Ah
22:02 < zipcpi> exp: abu jo'u by jo'u cy vu'o poi cmima lu'i ro kacna'u
22:02 < mensi> ([{<(¹a bu¹) BOI> <jo'u (¹by BOI¹)> <jo'u (¹cy BOI¹)>} {vu'o <poi (¹CU [cmima {lu'i <ro BOI> kacna'u KU} LUhU] VAU¹)> KUhO}] VAU)
22:03 < zipcpi> exp: ro abu jo'u ro by jo'u ro cy vu'o poi cmima lu'i ro kacna'u ku'o
22:03 < mensi> ([{<(¹ro BOI¹) (¹a bu¹) BOI> <jo'u (¹ro BOI¹) (¹by BOI¹)> <jo'u (¹ro BOI¹) (¹cy BOI¹)>} {vu'o <poi (¹CU [cmima {lu'i <ro BOI> kacna'u KU} LUhU] VAU¹)> ku'o}] VAU)
22:04 < zipcpi> exp: ro abu jo'u ro by jo'u ro cy vu'o poi cmima lu'i ro kacna'u ku'o ro ny poi mulna'u zi'epoi dubmau li re zo'u
22:04 < mensi> ([{<(¹[ro BOI] [a bu] BOI¹) (¹jo'u [ro BOI] [by BOI]¹) (¹jo'u [ro BOI] [cy BOI]¹)> <vu'o (¹poi [CU {cmima <lu'i (²ro BOI²) kacna'u KU> LUhU} VAU]¹) ku'o>} {ro BOI} {ny BOI} {poi <CU (¹mulna'
22:04 < mensi> u VAU¹)> KUhO} {zi'e <poi (¹CU [dubmau {li <re BOI> LOhO} VAU]¹) KUhO>}] zo'u)
22:06 < zipcpi> exp: no lu'i abu ce by ce cy vu'o poi cmima lu'i ro kacna'u ku'o ro ny poi mulna'u zi'epoi dubmau li re zo'u
22:06 < mensi> ([{<no BOI> <lu'i (¹[{a bu} BOI] [ce {by BOI}] [ce {cy BOI}]¹) (¹vu'o [poi {CU <cmima (²lu'i [ro BOI] kacna'u KU²) LUhU> VAU}] ku'o¹)> LUhU} {ro BOI} {ny BOI} {poi <CU (¹mulna'u VAU¹)> KUhO}
22:06 < mensi>  {zi'e <poi (¹CU [dubmau {li <re BOI> LOhO} VAU]¹) KUhO>}] zo'u)
22:07 < zipcpi> Hm no the terms should be reversed
22:22 < zipcpi> exp: ro ny poi mulna'u gi'e dubmau
22:22 < mensi> ([{ro BOI} {ny BOI} {poi <(¹CU [mulna'u VAU]¹) (¹gi'e [CU {dubmau VAU}] VAU¹)> KUhO}] VAU)
23:10 < gleki> mensi: do durka i think that no new extensions should be installed
23:10 < mensi> gleki: cu'u la'o gy.durka42.gy.: what do you think about instaling this? https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/
23:10 < mensi> Extension:EPubExport | 2015-07-20T20:37:42.098Z
23:10 < mensi> You are being a bit negative.
23:10 < gleki> mensi: doi durka i think that no new extensions should be installed. 
23:10 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.durka.gy. di'a cusku da
23:13 < gleki> mensi: doi durka as for exporting wiki pages to other formats i suggest that all of them are formatted under strictly formalized guidelines, then you could understand how those MediaWiki templates (that YOU know how they work), syntax is related to the language you need.
23:13 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.durka.gy. di'a cusku da
23:14 < gleki> mensi: doi durka then via MediaWiki API your scripts will download the source and convert it. seriously. mediawiki formatting is too rich. no such extensions work well with mediawiki templating
23:14 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.durka.gy. di'a cusku da
23:31 < gleki> mensi: doi zipcpi {sei ca ko'a} doesnt work alone since it must have a selbri
23:31 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.zipcpi.gy. di'a cusku da
--- Day changed Tue Jul 21 2015
02:32 < gleki> en:some
02:32 < mensi> 270 da se tolcri: su'o, bu'a, bu'e, bu'i, co'e, da, da'au, datpre, de, di, falgau, farja'o, gincilta, gledji, jifnarju'o,
02:32 < mensi> karpo'i, kukselzba, kukselzbasu, la su'oda, mlibra, na'ebo, nerbi'o, pipcarna, piso'o, pisu'o,
02:32 < mensi> samjavyfonxypliduskemjuglerci'analka'ebi'ojaxyja'e, samyuan, seljunri, selskutidmulbi'o, selteptce, suzroi,
02:32 < mensi> vibnrbarpinji, xrucpe, zo'ei, adzau, aigne, anste, banli, barkla, befcaucreka, benre, besto, blurdrakono, bongu,
02:32 < mensi> bruneleskia, bu'ai, bu'oi, campu, cau'i, cau'o'e, ci'ai, ci'oi, cisma, cistrxrudu, ckajrdinti, cmeta, cnemu, co'udzau,
02:32 < mensi> crarai, da'ei, daigno, da'oi, dau'a, de'au, debrfaba, dekpu, di'au, di'ei, digno, di'oi, dizlo, djalazani, drata, dricai,
02:32 < mensi> drudi, dzaunlai, e'elxam, etxani, etxanoli, e'urfausiace'a, ...
02:36 < durka42> hmm, different LE have different expansions for LE PA
02:36 < mensi> durka42: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: i think that no new extensions should be installed. | 2015-07-21T06:10:49.
02:36 < mensi> 529Z
02:36 < mensi> durka42: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: as for exporting wiki pages to other formats i suggest that all of them are formatted
02:36 < mensi> under strictly formalized guidelines, then you could understand how those MediaWiki templates (that YOU know how they
02:36 < mensi> work), syntax is related to the language you need. | 2015-07-21T06:13:50.040Z
02:36 < mensi> durka42: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: then via MediaWiki API your scripts will download the source and convert it. seriously.
02:36 < mensi> mediawiki formatting is too rich. no such extensions work well with mediawiki templating | 2015-07-21T06:14:32.
02:36 < mensi> 670Z
02:37 < gleki> strange. now "en: some" now works correctly
02:37 < gleki> mensi: gadri
02:37 < mensi> lo [PA] broda = zo'e noi ke'a broda [gi'e zilkancu li PA lo broda]
02:37 < mensi> la [PA] broda = zo'e noi lu [PA] broda li'u cmene ke'a mi
02:37 < mensi> lo PA sumti = lo PA me sumti
02:37 < mensi> la PA sumti = zo'e noi lu PA sumti li'u cmene ke'a mi
02:37 < mensi> loi [PA] broda = lo gunma be lo [PA] broda
02:37 < mensi> lai [PA] broda = lo gunma be la [PA] broda
02:37 < mensi> loi PA sumti = lo gunma be lo PA sumti
02:37 < mensi> lai PA sumti = lo gunma be la PA sumti
02:37 < mensi> lo'i [PA] broda = lo selcmi be lo [PA] broda
02:37 < mensi> la'i [PA] broda = lo selcmi be la [PA] broda
02:37 < mensi> lo'i PA sumti = lo selcmi be lo PA sumti
02:37 < mensi> la'i PA sumti = lo selcmi be la PA sumti
02:37 < mensi> PA sumti = PA da poi ke'a me sumti
02:37 < mensi> PA broda = PA da poi broda
02:37 < mensi> piPA sumti = lo piPA si'e be pa me sumti
02:37 < durka42> yeah... I'm not going to do that and maintain such scripts
02:37 < durka42> I just thought we could try it to see if epub export works
02:37 < gleki> and im not going to increase memory load for lmw
02:37 < durka42> ku'i a'icu'i
02:37 < gleki> even tweetanew is disabled
02:38 < durka42> and nothing of value was lost zo'o
02:38 < gleki> something was lost since people retweeted what uitki posted
02:39 < durka42> ua
02:39 < gleki> i need to write a script to read rss of le uitki and post news to twitter
02:40 < durka42> but then where do you run it .u'i
02:42 < gleki> https://github.com/pxg/Node-Rss-to-Twitter
02:42 < gleki> the script is so small that i dont even want to use it
02:47 < gleki> zantufa: na'e bo mi mo
02:47 < zantufa> ([{na'e bo} mi LUhU] CU [mo VAU])
02:47 < gleki> zantufa: na'e mi mo
02:47 < zantufa> ([na'e mi] CU [mo VAU])
02:49 < gleki> zantufa: na'e bo noi mo vau mi mo
02:49 < zantufa> ([{na'e bo} {noi <CU (¹mo vau¹)> KUhO} mi LUhU] CU [mo VAU])
02:49 < gleki> zantufa: na'e noi mo vau mi mo
02:49 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
02:49 < gleki> je'e
02:50 < gleki> no, it makes no sense
02:52 < gleki> how should it even be understood
02:52 < gleki> na'e modifies only NOI ?
02:54 < Amnadya> coi stati remna
02:54 < Amnadya> Could a smart Lojbanist tell me what they think about https://www.reddit.com/r/Ithkuil/comments/3d07k4/how_to_specify_destination_another_missing_case/
02:55 < durka42> na'i
02:55 < durka42> would you accept a dumb lojbanist's opinion?
02:55 < Amnadya> I don't see any, but yes.
02:55 < durka42> :)
02:56 < Amnadya> Sometimes Ithkuil has very straightforward methods for saying stuff, but sometimes JQ comes up with rather contrived-seeming solutions.
02:56 < gleki> yy mi jinvi da
02:56 < gleki> i mi tugni la selpa'i
02:57 < Amnadya> ua
02:57 < gleki> i la versiio ka'e vlipa
02:57 < Amnadya> However, maybe I just don't understand it well enough
02:58 < gleki> ka'eku lo do menli co'a lojbo i ku'i ibu na jbobau gi'e na lobykai gi'e la'acu'i na bridi bangu
02:58 < Amnadya> lakne
02:59 < durka42> are there short definitions of CPT, PRG and ICP somewhere?
03:00 < Amnadya> CPT = completive version, PRG progressive aspect, ICP inceptive extension
03:00 < gleki> http://ithkuil.net/abbreviations.html
03:00 < Amnadya> PRG = ca'O
03:00 < Amnadya> CPT is related to mo'u
03:01 < Amnadya> ICP is lo tolfa'o be
03:01 < gleki> there is also a never complete notes for lojbanists https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SI7G0C-MoJIZ51N8jhL_7rLd6mIHA4Waq3F7w159RRs/edit
03:02 < gleki> no'i do ka'e xusra lo du'u ibu spofu i ku'i mu'a la nutka i na bridi bangu i ku'i ca'a se pilno
03:03 < durka42> vlaste: nutka
03:03 < vlaste> nutka = x1 talks in a non-sumti-or-predicate manner x2 (property of x1)
03:03 < gleki> number = expr:(PA_clause (PA_clause / lerfu_word)*) {return _node("number", expr); }
03:03 < gleki> lerfu_string = expr:(lerfu_word (PA_clause / lerfu_word)*) {return _node("lerfu_string", expr); }
03:03 < durka42> wat
03:03 < Amnadya> .i ku'i va'o ku la .itku'ile cu nandu ki'u nai lo nu lo gerna cu pluja je ki'u ja'ai lo nu lo smuni ciste na .y jai li'armi sa'e nai ru'e
03:04 < gleki> en: baurnu'uku
03:04 < mensi> baurnu'uku = x1 is the language with ISO 639-3 code ''nuk'' (Nuu-chah-nulth, Nootka) |>>> See also bangu |>>>
03:04 < mensi> gleki
03:04 < gleki> Amnadya: #ermenefti xu
03:04 < durka42> now I'm thinking about how to translate those examples to lojban
03:05 < gleki> this number/lerfu_string distinction is just lol
03:05 < durka42> seka'a and fa'a, I guess
03:05 < Amnadya> do'e lo jbobau lo nu cilre fi zo nu je zo lo cu se jalge lo nu jimpe fi lu lo nu li'u .i jicmu lo jbobau .i frili .i la .itku'ile zo'u mo .i na va'arga
03:05 < Amnadya> .i lo gerna na nabmi
03:05 < gleki> off: abu za'ure'u mo
03:05 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
03:05 < gleki> because number must start with a PA
03:06 < gleki> off: za'uabu re'u mo
03:06 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "z" found.
03:06 < gleki> off: za'u abu re'u mo
03:06 < mensi> ([{<za'u (¹a bu¹)> re'u} mo] VAU)
03:06 < gleki> so we can say ">a" times but not "a times"
03:07 < Amnadya> ie .i mi na nelci
03:07 < mensi> mi xebni
03:07 < gleki> re do xebni
03:07 < durka42> camxes: +exp vei abu re'u mo
03:07 < camxes> (CU [{<vei (¹[a bu] BOI¹) VEhO> re'u} mo] VAU)
03:08 < gleki> "Alas for altást." (C)
03:08 < gleki> altasta = x1 (text) is a word or construct having grammatical limitations x2 (property of x1) that make no sense
03:11 < durka42> according to x3 by logic system x4
03:11 < Amnadya> xu na betri fa lo nu facki lo du'u lo pluja gerna ba'e na je lo smuni nu kalsa cu ralju krinu lo nu la .itku'ile cu nandu je ba jai se fliba fai lo ka co'a certu
03:13 < durka42> .u'i
03:13 < gleki> y i ku'i mi nelci je se pluka lo ka tadni lo smuni i na vjni mi falonu na ka'e akti
03:14 < gleki> i mu'a xo da se bangu la lojban i so'u da i simsa ibu
03:14 < gleki> i ko pilno lo glibau e lo bancumunu e PHP i ki'u bo ralju bangu
03:15 < durka42> ni'o mi puzi co'a tcidu la'o sy la luna es una cruel amante sy .i lo skami cu se bangu la loglan
03:16 < gleki> durka42: ( VEI_clause mex VEhO_elidible / number ) ROI_clause i fegli
03:17 < gleki> durka42: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/bryan-singer-tackling-sci-fi-778949
03:17 < Amnadya> so'o remna ca'o troci lo ka certu tau la .itku'ile kei je ja'a djica lo nu se bangu .i lo nu da'i spofu cu se badri ca lo nu da'i facki
03:18 < gleki> ke'u gau ko e'u ibu gletu la to'anzu
03:18 < gleki> i za'adai JW na permite fi lo ka cnegau
03:18 < gleki> sa'ai JQ le'ai
03:19 < Amnadya> la zgana be la .ie'ovas.
03:20 < durka42> xu zo be ji zo pe
03:20 < durka42> .wik Jehovah's Witness
03:21 < fenki> "Jehovah's Witnesses is a millenarian restorationist Christian denomination with nontrinitarian beliefs distinct from mainstream Christianity." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah's_Witness
03:21 < Amnadya> be ja pe oO
03:23  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/ifle    if x1 (proposition) is true then x2 (event) happens else x3 (event) happens [http://bit.ly/1IhhP6u]
03:23 < durka42> aizeias bu voci pi'e pano mai lu do'o me lo mi zgana sei la .ie'ovas. cu cusku je lo mi selfu noi mi ba'o cuxna tu'a ke'a
03:24 < gleki> lo vedli be la ie'ovas
03:25 < durka42> sumlafi
03:25 < Amnadya> .oi .u'i xu lo cevni na ka'e fasnu ja bridi
03:25 < Amnadya> .i kakne ro da
03:25 < durka42> ie
03:25 < durka42> xu la ie'ovas cu cevni
03:26 < Amnadya> li'a
03:26 < Amnadya> .i datcme
03:26 < Amnadya> .i cevni lo se cevni
03:26 < gleki> o'i brod lo se broda
03:27 < Amnadya> cevni ma kau
03:27 < gleki> i la'oi DCY vajni javni
03:28 < durka42> xu zoi gy I am that I am gy cu xe fanva lu mi me ma kau li'u
03:28 < Amnadya> .u'i
03:29 < durka42> lo cevni ku po'o cu jai se curmi fai lo ka pilno lu ma kau li'u poi na nenri lo mutybri
03:29 < Amnadya> .i lo krici be lo xriso cu ze'u sai dambysi'u tu'a lo smuni
03:29 < gleki> je'usai ermenefti
03:29 < durka42> lojbo panra
03:29 < gleki> alta: abu re'u mo
03:29 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <(¹a bu¹) re'u> mo} VAU])
03:30 < durka42> alta: abu za'u re'u mo
03:30 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA ZOhE} {CU <(¹[a bu] za'u¹) re'u> mo} VAU])
03:30 < gleki> :P
03:30 < durka42> .u'i
03:30 < durka42> alta: abu boi za'u re'u mo
03:30 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <a bu> boi} {CU <za'u re'u> mo} VAU])
03:30 < durka42> alta: abu boinai za'u re'u mo
03:30 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <(¹a bu¹) boi> nai} {CU <za'u re'u> mo} VAU])
03:30 < Amnadya> la .ba'amut. cu zanru
03:30 < gleki> oi mi co'u morji lo du'u la ba'a mut cu mokau
03:30 < durka42> LA BAHAMUT CU CUSKU LO SE CUSKU BE LA BAHAMUT
03:30 < gleki> i la'a tolxorxe
03:31 < gleki> abuboi nai ~=- na'e abu boi
03:32 < gleki> i va'oku zo nai pritu je ckilu cmavo
03:32 < gleki> gi'enai cnima'o stika
03:32 < gleki> ibo ma'i la altatufa
03:34 < gleki> i cinri falo nu lo mekso pe la zantufa pu jai se facki mi fai lo ka mulno mapti ro drata pagbu be lo gerna pe la altatufa
03:36  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: そういえば、昨日nifさんが dancari って言ってたので、思わずそれを文字った zancari を定義してしまた　http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/zancari [http://bit.ly/1IhjARn]
04:15 < gleki> either 1. {vei ny} and {pa} are numbers, {ny} and {pabu} are pronouns, or 2. unification, {pa} works as a pronoun except for {PA SELBRI/SUMTI/ROI/MAI/MOI}
04:40 < zipcpi> I prefer 1; PA as pronouns give me a headache
04:40 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: {sei ca ko'a} doesnt work alone since it must have a selbri | 2015-07-21T06:31:12.607Z
04:40 < mensi> mediawiki formatting is too rich. no such extensions work well with mediawiki templating | 2015-07-21T06:14:32.
04:40 < mensi> 670Z
04:40 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: {sei ca ko'a} doesnt work alone since it must have a selbri | 2015-07-21T06:31:12.
04:40 < mensi> 607ZMediaWiki API your scripts will download the source and convert it. seriously. mediawiki formatting is too rich. no
04:40 < mensi> such extensions work well with mediawiki templating | 2015-07-21T06:14:32.670Z
04:40 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: {sei ca ko'a} doesnt work alone since it must have a selbri | 2015-07-21T06:31:12.
04:40 < mensi> 607Z
04:40 < zipcpi> Er, yes, I know... but alta is alta :p
04:41 < zipcpi> Anyway I added {zo'au} to JVS, though it has a competing def
04:42 < zipcpi> And lol Zantufa... she repurposed FA for to'ai/vo'ai/xo'ai
04:42 < durka42> wat
04:42 < zipcpi> Yes
04:42 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/zantufa_ze%27oi_FA
04:43 < zipcpi> What would the rafsi be even :p
04:43 < durka42> ua
04:43 < durka42> .u'i
04:43 < durka42> rafsi: faq feq fiq foq fuq
04:43 < zipcpi> u'i
04:44 < durka42> nah I don't like that
04:44 < durka42> it seems useful at first but it's way inconsistent
04:44 < durka42> conflicts with tag unification
04:44 < durka42> maybe I'll come around later though
04:44 < zipcpi> Problem with Eulojban-q is that CVq rafsi has this little problem of being ambiguous before k/g/x. Unless we force it to always have a -y-
04:45 < zipcpi> Or have a -y- before k/g/x, but that's a little more complicated
04:45 < mensi> y no da se tolcri
04:46 < zipcpi> .y. ri'a ma la mensi cu spuda
04:46 < gleki> do pu cusku zo'o raf:
04:46 < gleki> sa
04:46 < gleki> i do pu cusku zo'oi rafsi:
04:47 < gleki> any other opinions on lerfu vs. numbers?
04:47 < zipcpi> I have my own Eulojban suggestion but it's a little crazy
04:48 < zipcpi> Basically ca'e all lerfu pronouns can only have one letter, unless you use {leu} (selma'o LI, suggested ortho-Lojban variant {ko'ai})
04:49 < durka42> zipcpi: I thought you said qk/qg/qx would be a disallowed pair, then there is no problem
04:49 < zipcpi> Hm...
04:49 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: {sei ca ko'a} doesnt work alone since it must have a selbri | 2015-07-21T06:31:12.
04:49 < mensi> 607ZMediaWiki API your scripts will download the source and convert it. seriously. mediawiki formatting is too rich. no
04:49 < mensi> such extensions work well with mediawiki templating | 2015-07-21T06:14:32.670Z
04:49 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: {sei ca ko'a} doesnt work alone since it must have a selbri | 2015-07-21T06:31:12.
04:49 < mensi> 607Z
04:49 < zipcpi> ...
04:49 < gleki> sorry
04:49 < gleki> it's because i reloaded mensi
04:49 < gleki> alta: pa cu mo
04:49 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <pa BOI>} {cu <mo VAU>}])
04:49 < gleki> alta: pa mo
04:49 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <pa BOI> mo KU} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
04:49 < durka42> ambigu
04:49 < durka42> alta: pa da mo
04:49 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <pa BOI> da} {CU <mo VAU>}])
04:50 < gleki> na ambigu
04:50 < durka42> alta: pa lo broda cu mo
04:50 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <pa BOI> <lo broda KU>} {cu <mo VAU>}])
04:50 < durka42> alta: lo broda pa mo
04:50 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA (¹lo broda KU¹)> <FE (¹pa BOI¹) mo KU>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
04:50 < durka42> alta: lo pa broda be re mo
04:50 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <lo (¹[pa BOI] [broda {be <FE (²re BOI²) mo KU>} BEhO]¹) KU>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
04:50 < gleki> i ku'i simlu lo ka ambigu i lo nu go'i ka'e nabmi lo remna
04:50 < durka42> alta: lo pa broda be re cu mo
04:50 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <lo (¹[pa BOI] [broda {be <FE (²re BOI²)>} BEhO]¹) KU>} {cu <mo VAU>}])
04:50 < durka42> maybe
04:51 < durka42> I mean "this PEG is not ambiguous" is a trivial statement :p
04:51 < gleki> u'i ie
04:51 < Amnadya> I think I'd rather see {lo brode be re cu mo} as {lo brode be re lo cohe cu mo}
04:52 < durka42> obviously it's {lo broda be re me zo cu be'o mo}
04:52 < Amnadya> Option 3: BY becomes part of PA. Neither are pro-sumti. (Just listing it for completeness)
04:53 < zipcpi> Another thing about Eulojban is that it'd more accurately transcribe Euclid's name. Though you can probably say that about any phonemic expansion, then we end up with Ithkuil :p
04:55 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/The_North_Wind_and_the_Sun#la_zipcpi.27s_version.2C_2015
04:55 < zipcpi> Gonna have to define {selkufygla}
04:55 < Amnadya> by LLG ?
04:55 < durka42> comfortably warm?
04:56 < zipcpi> Yes
04:56 < Amnadya> When has LLG ever translated something
04:56 < zipcpi> I'm not sure o.o
04:56 < durka42> pusaiku
04:56 < gleki> ba lo nu la gleki co'a cmima
04:56 < durka42> ue 2015 xu
04:56 < Amnadya> do du la gleki je nai LLG .i la gleki pu fanva
04:56 < durka42> ah it's an "everybody has a share" kind of thing then
04:56 < durka42> xu doi la .mailos.
04:56 < gleki> i ku' ma'a nitcu lo catni xe fanva
04:57 < durka42> shouldn't you ask others before calling yours catni, .u'i
04:57 < Amnadya> ie sai
04:57 < gleki> mi pu cpedu
04:57 < Amnadya> What is pre-Lojban?
04:57 < durka42> tolclite
04:57 < gleki> i ku'i no drata be la lojbab pu spusku
04:57 < durka42> gleki: .i ma pu danfu
04:58 < gleki> i ko tcidu lo LLG mriste
04:58 < durka42> lo nu na spusku na sai nu zanru
04:58 < durka42> li'a
04:58 < zipcpi> I dunno... but the style is that really old style I remember, like the preponderance of rafsi cmene
04:58 < zipcpi> An actual use of jei lol
04:58 < durka42> since it's the LLG's translation and I'm a member I can edit it to add pauses, right?
04:59 < gleki> li'a
04:59 < zipcpi> I think I can drop the sel-
05:00 < gleki> i mi pu nitcu lo catni xe fanva xau la uikipediias
05:00 < durka42> na'i .i mi glare je kufra
05:00 < durka42> zo'o
05:00 < zipcpi> u'i
05:00 < gleki> i ku'i no pilno be la uikipediias pu pante 
05:00 < gleki> i ja'o na vajni lo nu xukau lo catni  cu zasti
05:00 < gleki> *fa
05:01 < Amnadya> There needs to be a mechanism by which a text becomes officially LLG approved. But until LLG actually votes or whatnot it's misleading to call anything an LLG translation.
05:01 < durka42> mi morji lo mristeka'u .i ku'i .ei gaje bitygau lo drata lo du'u zabna gi ba'e nai sevzi catni xusra
05:01 < zipcpi> ganaida'i do glare je kufra gi li'a lo nu do glare cu se kufra do
05:02 < durka42> mi glare prenu iau ro'u
05:02 < gleki> Amnadya: e'u do fanva gi'e mrilu fi lo LLG mriste
05:02 < Amnadya> no'e jetnu .i ka'e glare je kufra be lo ka zvati ma kau .i na nibli lo du'u se pluka lo ka glare
05:03 < Amnadya> .i na cinri mi doi la gleki .i lo lisri cu to'e cinri .i je mi senpi lo du'u vajni fa lo nu LLG cu zukte lo srana
05:04 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/fancylojban_challenges xu lemedeimoi cinri
05:04 < Amnadya> cu *
05:04 < zipcpi> si cu cinri
05:04 < Amnadya> ka'e cinri lo skami se cinri
05:07 < gleki> do pante i ku'i na dudvota
05:08 < zipcpi> adzau ma
05:08 < gleki> lo xe fanva
05:41 < zipcpi> exp: .i ku'i .ei gaje bitygau lo drata lo du'u zabna gi ba'e nai sevzi catni xusra
05:41 < zipcpi> alta: .i ku'i .ei gaje bitygau lo drata lo du'u zabna gi ba'e nai sevzi catni xusra
05:41 < mensi> ([i {ku'i ei}] [CU {ga je} {CU <bitygau (¹lo drata KU¹) (¹lo [du'u {CU <zabna VAU>} KEI] KU¹)> VAU} {gi <ba'e nai>} {CU <sevzi catni xusra> VAU} VAU])
05:41 < mensi> (NIhO [i {ku'i ei}] [CU {ga je} {CU <bitygau (¹[FA {lo drata KU}] [FA {lo <du'u (²[FA ZOhE] [CU {zabna VAU}]²) KEI> KU}]¹) VAU>} {gi <ba'e nai>} {CU <sevzi catni> xusra} VAU])
05:42 < durka42> seems the same
05:42 < zipcpi> I have no idea what cogas means by {zancari}
05:44 < durka42> the lojban def seems straightforward
05:44 < gleki> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%96%AD%E6%8D%A8%E9%9B%A2
05:45 < gleki> xm
05:45 < zipcpi> durka42: Oh yeah didn't think to look there
05:46 < gleki> it's like making something without unnecessary decorations
05:47 < gleki> sampu isnt enogh imo
05:47 < zipcpi> Probably
05:47 < gleki> wow, so slow
05:47 < mensi> gleki: cu'u la'o gy.zipcpi.gy.: Oh yeah... forgot about that. Must've been a brain-fart.... though the web version does
05:47 < mensi> lack the "alta" version though that marks the place structure | 2015-05-13T19:48:23.
05:47 < mensi> 719Z
05:48 < zipcpi> ... laldo laldo
05:48 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: try describing the priority of nai/toi'e/cai etc. in an article like it's done for ke/bo
05:48 < mensi> etc. in Waves. | 2015-05-22T06:08:35.669Z
05:48 < zipcpi> oi oi oi oi oi
05:48 < gleki> mensi should trim dots automatically
05:52 < gleki> mensi: doi zipcpi.... coi
05:52 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.zipcpi.....gy. di'a cusku da
05:53 < zipcpi> coi
05:54 < gleki> oi mi bebna i na cikre
05:54 < gleki> i ku'i mi cikre lo drata
05:55 < gleki> alta: pa mo
05:55 < niftg> denpAbu so'i mei
05:55 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <pa BOI> mo KU} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
05:55 < gleki> alta: ny mo
05:55 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <ny BOI>} {CU <mo VAU>}])
05:55 < gleki> alta: pabu mo
05:55 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <pa bu> BOI} {CU <mo VAU>}])
05:55 < gleki> alta: vei ny mo
05:56 < gleki> zo'o nandu preti
05:56 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <(¹vei ny VEhO¹) BOI> mo KU} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
05:57 < gleki> ie
05:57 < gleki> alta: vei ny pa mo
05:57 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <(¹vei ny pa VEhO¹) BOI> mo KU} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
05:57 < gleki> li'o
06:04 < zipcpi> mi fanva fi lo tcekitaujei .i xu srera
06:04 < zipcpi> .y. la jbouitki cu spofu ga'ami
06:05 < zipcpi> go'ijamasno
06:10 < zipcpi> zantufa so breaks my use of {ibabo} there
06:10 < zipcpi> I'd be needing {iau} everywhere
06:11 < zipcpi> .i le remei cu tugni zu'ai lo du'u, lo traji be lo ka clira fa lo nu ce'u snada lo ka gau ce'u le litru co'u dasni le kosta, cu ei jai se pajni fai lo ka traji lo ka vlipa  <-- so much nesting
06:13 < Amnadya> traji lo ka broda could be condensed
06:14 < zipcpi> How? tanru? relyle'ujvo?
06:14 < Amnadya> brodyrai
06:14 < zipcpi> lol
06:14 < Amnadya> What? :O
06:15 < zipcpi> :p
06:15 < ctefaho> ӏИ шоы ро до ӏИ до мо
06:15 < niftg> шоы
06:15 < gleki> ми лифри ло ка банзу забна. и ма нузба дой ла штефа'о
06:15 < zipcpi> I guess {vlipyrai} isn't too bad though
06:15 < gleki> и зо шой драни
06:15 < zipcpi> Not as if that lujvo could mean anything else
06:16 < gleki> и зо'ой шои жи'а драни
06:16 < Amnadya> It's a completely normal CLL lujvo.
06:16 < gleki> interesting that under this lerfu/namcu split {li abu mo} becomes ungrammatical
06:17 < gleki> it could theoretically be parsed as {li lo'o abu mo}
06:17 < ctefaho> (in other news I now hate Microsoft's keyboard layouts too)
06:18 < gleki> this of course makes sense since {li} accepts only mex
06:18 < zipcpi> exp: li abu mo
06:18 < mensi> ([li {<a bu> BOI} LOhO] [CU {mo VAU}])
06:18 < niftg> mi darsi punji po'o lo fukpi be lo lerpoi poi cy ke'a ciska
06:18  * ctefaho brb
06:18 < zipcpi> No, letters can stand in for numbers. All the split does, is that "letter strings" can no longer contain PA
06:19 < zipcpi> off: li pa ry
06:19 < mensi> ([li {<pa ry> BOI} LOhO] VAU)
06:19 < gleki> the problem is that complicates other parts of the grammar
06:19 < zipcpi> exp: li pa ry
06:19 < mensi> ([{li <pa BOI> LOhO} {ry BOI}] VAU)
06:19 < gleki> i now implemented {vei ny} and {pa} as numbers
06:20 < zipcpi> exp: pa ry
06:20 < zipcpi> off: pa ry
06:20 < mensi> ([{pa BOI} {ry BOI}] VAU)
06:20 < mensi> ([pa ry] BOI)
06:20 < zipcpi> Oh crap
06:20 < gleki> and {ny} and {pabu } as pronouns
06:20 < zipcpi> That means my fancylojban thing relies on xornunsei
06:21 < gleki> what is gendra now in alta is {li vei abu}
06:21 < zipcpi> I don't see why {li lo'o abu} should be a preferred interpretation over {li abu lo'o}
06:22 < gleki> we can assume that {vei} can be elided after {li} but for that we need just another mex that allows first {vei} be elided. it means creating another mex grammar for {li} only
06:22 < zipcpi> Famyma'o should be delayed as long as possible
06:22 < ctefaho> gleki: idea is ĭ <-> й, ŭ <-> ў, ị<->ы ụ<->ю
06:22  * ctefaho brb2
06:22 < gleki> ctefaho: ы is {y}
06:22 < gleki> ю is {iu}
06:23 < gleki> lerfu fi lo nu prami
06:23 < ctefaho> I know I have overridden them
06:24 < ctefaho> Unless you think some other letters are less bad for ị and ụ ?
06:24 < gleki> the first is definitely й
06:24 < gleki> the second doesnt exist in Russian
06:24 < ctefaho> what is ĭ then?
06:24 < gleki> й
06:24 < ctefaho> I don't use Russian cyrillic I use unicode cyrillic
06:25 < gleki> [w] does exist in Belarussian
06:25 < gleki> ў yes
06:25 < gleki> what is ụ for?[D
06:26 < gleki> i think i dont understand your symbols
06:26 < ctefaho> just [ʊ], ideally
06:26 < ctefaho> or [w] too
06:26 < ctefaho> ị = [ɪ]/[ʏ] ([j])
06:26 < gleki> and ŭ ?
06:26 < ctefaho> [w]
06:26 < ctefaho> ị as [j]
06:26 < ctefaho> ..
06:27 < ctefaho> ĭ as [j]*
06:27 < gleki> there is only one letter for [w] in Cyrillic scripts
06:27 < gleki> and one for [j]
06:28 < ctefaho> I just didn't see any that would fit ị and ụ well so I just took ы and ю
06:28 < ctefaho> (а́ е́ и́ о́ у́ ә́ for stress marking)
06:29 < gleki> i think not stressed ы is lojban {y}
06:29 < ctefaho> I did cyrillic schwa for "y"
06:29  * ctefaho hides
06:30  * ctefaho also brbx3
06:31  * nuzba @464161niftg: .u'i zo'oi minimalist noi la'a ca bu'u se smuni lo cizra co'a https://twitter.com/oka_iu_tcan/status/623439221840179200 [http://bit.ly/1Lq7ypd]
06:33 < gleki> at least now {li vei} is a workaround, sounds like {li'ei} O_0
06:34 < zipcpi> li vei ry re dy re ?
06:34 < gleki> alta: li vei ry re dy re
06:34 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹[vei {ry <re dy>} re VEhO] BOI¹) LOhO>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
06:35 < gleki> otherwise how would you say "Empty string is loved by Bergu"?
06:36 < gleki> alta: li by se nelci
06:36 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
06:36 < gleki> i can fix that :)
06:36 < gleki> alta: li lo'o by se nelci
06:36 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA (¹li lo'o¹)> <FE (¹by BOI¹)>} {CU <se nelci> VAU}])
06:36 < zipcpi> I dunno, explicitly say lilo'o? Or use Curtis-zai'e (move it to zai'u or something) :p
06:36 < gleki> en:zai'e
06:36 < mensi> zai'e = [BAhE] jargon word indicator; indicates next word is a jargon word
06:36 < zipcpi> No, that's my zai'e
06:36 < gleki> mensi: aigne
06:36 < mensi> CommonSenseError: Expected normal word but Curtis found.
06:36 < zipcpi> My zai'e won out over his zai'e
06:37 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/zai'e
06:37 < zipcpi> But XOhEhOhE is a lol-worthy selma'o
06:38 < zipcpi> And I have no idea how it would work
06:38 < zipcpi> From what I can tell it's supposed to be able to replace both PA and BY
06:45 < gleki> okay what if {li} accepts a lerfu string but lerfu are either PAbu or {ny}?
06:46 < Amnadya> mi na nelci
06:46 < mensi> i mi i mi i mi mo i mi na nelci
06:46 < gleki> alta: li abu repapapabu mo
06:47 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹[a bu] [re pa pa] [pa bu]¹) LOhO>} {CU <mo VAU>}])
06:47 < gleki> alta: li abu re mo
06:47 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA (¹li [a bu] LOhO¹)> <FE (¹re BOI¹) mo KU>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
06:47 < zipcpi> My own Eulojban suggestion, *and* also my jo'aucu'i xornunsei suggestion, does not touch LI...LOhO
06:47 < gleki> so basically {bu} is a terminator here
06:47 < gleki> Amnadya: do nelci ma
06:48 < gleki> i xu do djica tu'a lo valsi poi se gerna tu'a zo li'ei
06:48 < gleki> *te gerna
06:48 < gleki> *te gerna fi tu'a zo li'ei
06:48 < zipcpi> But my Eulojban suggestion breaks {bypyfyky cusku} in favor of {leu bypyfyky cusku} / {ko'ai bypyfyky cusku}
06:49 < Amnadya> mi so'o roi ciksi lo se nelci be mi
06:49 < zipcpi> It will interpret bypyfyky cusku as faby fepy fify foky cusku
06:49 < zipcpi> :p
06:49 < zipcpi> pai'e zbusufukai
06:50 < Amnadya> Then there are some 5 proposal so far
06:50 < zipcpi> My way though, it'll make single letterals a completely serviceable stand-in for ko'a-set without needing any {boi}s
06:51 < zipcpi> Except I did not spread my gift to mekso grammar... I don't care about mekso grammar anymore anyway T.T
06:51 < zipcpi> All I want is arbitrary charstrings
06:52 < zipcpi> Heck it's just a matter of time before I delete all VUhU from Eulojban :p
06:54 < ctefaho> gleki: this is what I use http://pastebin.com/RFz7jNw2
06:55 < ctefaho> ...change that Notepad++->Pastebin
06:56 < ctefaho> If you can think of better characters for ị and ụ do tell
06:58 < gleki> Ы is never pronounced that way
06:58 < gleki> it's never a semi-vowel
06:59 < gleki> Amnadya: mi na mulno jimpe lo se nelci be do i do pu xusra lo du'u do djica lo nu cikre lo cumka'i ciste i ku'i aupei lu abu mo li'u  co'a se smuni lu vei abu mo li'u
07:00 < ctefaho> gleki: ị and ụ are not semivowels in my speech
07:00 < ctefaho> or shouldn't be
07:00 < gleki> i fau lo nu mi'o na sanji ro lo se stidi vau mi stidi lo nu zbasu lo cnino ke uitki papri
07:01 < Amnadya> Here's a summary poll: http://strawpoll.me/4985847
07:03 < zipcpi> lol no option for xo'eucu'i?
07:03 < Amnadya> What's that?
07:03 < zipcpi> xorxes suggestion, except not toching LI...LOhO
07:04 < Amnadya> That's option 2
07:04 < zipcpi> Option 2 is full xorxes suggestion...
07:04 < Amnadya> Ah
07:05 < Amnadya> Well then there needs to be 2a and 2b
07:05 < zipcpi> Mhm
07:06 < zipcpi> And maybe there should be a "nothing" option as well
07:06 < durka42> Amnadya: okay, I voted :p
07:06 < durka42> isn't 1 the "nothing" option
07:06 < Amnadya> The only options I would currently give my consent to are 1 and 4.
07:06 < Amnadya> Yes
07:07 < zipcpi> lol 5 is too crazy T.T
07:08 < durka42> Amnadya: xu do na cusku fo lo BPFK co'e
07:08 < Amnadya> .i'a
07:08 < zipcpi> 3 is even worse though; I'm not even sure how that would work
07:09 < zipcpi> And I don't know how 4 would work unless we bring in my Eulojban categorical pronoun set, and even then I'd still like something to {goi} to every now and then
07:11 < zipcpi> And the categorical pronoun set is *the* #1 reason I invented Eulojban. Because it takes up so much cmavo space, and they all want to be monosyllabic T.T
07:12 < zipcpi> Can theoretically save two by dropping {feu} and {meu}, but still
07:13 < zipcpi> Hm without 2b I can only vote for 5. Or reluctantly 1, but only to keep LI...LOhO from breaking T.T
07:13 < durka42> xu ca su'o da do na titinmo
07:14 < Amnadya> This poll isn't anything official, just a list of stuff. I'll add 2b on the mriste
07:14 < durka42> oi
07:14 < durka42> xu ca su'o da do na tirtinmo
07:14 < zipcpi> tirtinmo ki'a
07:14 < Amnadya> Are there any other options I forgot?
07:15 < Amnadya> Or maybe you have some last-minute proposals?
07:15 < zipcpi> No... my Eulojban proposal is quite enough lol
07:16 < zipcpi> Wait wut
07:16 < zipcpi> Oh
07:16 < zipcpi> It reordered them
07:16 < zipcpi> Thought it somehow registed my vote for 5 as a vote for 2
07:18 < gleki> i cant vote
07:18 < gleki> my brain already exploded
07:18 < zipcpi> #1 is "nothing"
07:18 < zipcpi> If you'd prefer that
07:19 < gleki> i want {abu mo} retain its current meaning,as for lerfu detri i'd like {li jydy re} parse but if it's so neede then add {bu} to the end
07:19 < gleki> which option is that?
07:19 < gleki> or options
07:19 < zipcpi> #1 and #5 from what I can tell
07:19 < zipcpi> But #5 will break bypyfyky cusku
07:20 < Amnadya> #2
07:20 < zipcpi> No, #2 will break li jydy re
07:20 < zipcpi> Unless 2b
07:20 < Amnadya> He said he'd add bu
07:20 < gleki> no, option 1 is not for me
07:20 < zipcpi> Xorxes proposal will add {bu} to every single nacle'u
07:21 < zipcpi> Gleki: Then I think none of the options are suitable for you, unless maybe 2b is added
07:21 < gleki> when mensi arrives ...
07:21 < Amnadya> li jdydy rebu = #2
07:21 < Amnadya> jydyrebu
07:21 < gleki> alta: li jydy re mo
07:21 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA (¹li [jy dy] LOhO¹)> <FE (¹re BOI¹) mo KU>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
07:21 < gleki> se? those are two sumti now
07:21 < gleki> *see
07:21 < zipcpi> Amnadya: But he wants {li ny renopamubu}
07:21 < gleki> alta: li jydy rererere bu
07:21 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹jy dy [re re re] [re bu]¹) LOhO>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
07:21 < zipcpi> Not {li ny rebunobupabumubu
07:22 < zipcpi> Like what xorxes wants <.<
07:22 < Amnadya> This is starting to get annoying .u'i
07:22 < gleki> i'i
07:22 < gleki> i mi tatpi
07:22 < gleki> alta: li jy re bu no bu
07:22 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹jy [re bu] [no bu]¹) LOhO>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
07:22 < gleki> O_0
07:22 < gleki> who wrote altatufa ?
07:23 < zipcpi> Erm, it *will* work
07:23 < zipcpi> It always worked
07:23 < Amnadya> That's CLL
07:23 < gleki> my goal was to make as few rules as possible while retaining most current usage
07:23 < gleki> off: li jy re mo
07:23 < mensi> ([{li <(¹jy re¹) BOI> LOhO} CU] [mo VAU])
07:23 < gleki> aha. here is the difference
07:23 < gleki> alta: li jy re mo
07:23 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA (¹li jy LOhO¹)> <FE (¹re BOI¹) mo KU>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
07:24 < gleki> two sumti
07:24 < zipcpi> I don't really like it. It does the least damage to my detri system, but it would make reading arbitrary charstrings difficult
07:24 < gleki> but i can of course make {li} more powerful as in CLL
07:25 < gleki> alta: li ry re ry re bu
07:25 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹ry [re ry] [re bu]¹) LOhO>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
07:25 < gleki> you just terminate using {bu} in the very end
07:25 < zipcpi> Right
07:26 < gleki> i dont propose anything. im just trying to shrink PEG
07:26 < Amnadya> alta: li ry aigne bu
07:26 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹ry [aigne bu]¹) LOhO>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
07:26 < zipcpi> u'i
07:26 < zipcpi> alta: li ry re dy re aignebu
07:26 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA (¹li [ry {re dy}] LOhO¹)> <FE (¹re BOI¹) aignebu KU>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
07:27 < zipcpi> Oops
07:27 < zipcpi> alta: li ry re dy re aigne bu
07:27 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹ry [re dy] [re {aigne bu}]¹) LOhO>} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
07:27 < Amnadya> This is confusing.
07:27 < zipcpi> ie
07:28 < gleki> it only has the problem of gardenpathing
07:29 < gleki> someone starts dictating a password and everybody thinks "Will he put {bu} in the end?"
07:29 < zipcpi> The other to implement 5 is to rework {tei} so that it autocloses. Except I suggested {tei}<>{ne'e} in CKTJ T.T
07:29 < zipcpi> s/other/other method
07:29 < fenki> zipcpi meant to say: The other method to implement 5 is to rework {tei} so that it autocloses. Except I suggested {tei}<>{ne'e} in CKTJ T.T
07:30 < gleki> en: tei
07:30 < mensi> tei = [TEI] composite letteral follows; used for multi-character letterals. |>>>
07:30 < mensi> officialdata
07:30 < gleki> did xorxes want to put {bu} after each digits or only as {parecivomu bu}?
07:30 < zipcpi> After each digit
07:31 < gleki> *digit
07:31 < gleki> oh
07:31 < zipcpi> mabla mi ji'a
07:31 < gleki> with {li} in front?
07:31 < Amnadya> fi do
07:31 < gleki> or only with {me'o}?
07:31 < Amnadya> li = me'o
07:31 < zipcpi> li and me'o are both in LI
07:33 < durka42> zipcpi: lo ka ti'inmo cu ka cinmo la'e zoi zoi T.T zoi .i za'a do ze'e ti'inmo
07:33 < zipcpi> u'i
07:34 < durka42> ji'a mi na djuno lo du'u lo ka ti'inmo cu mo
07:34 < zipcpi> ca'e eutca
07:34 < gleki> 4 total votes
07:35 < Amnadya> 4 votes by tinkerers and the conservative option is winning
07:35 < zipcpi> Selpa'i voted for two I think
07:35 < zipcpi> lol
07:35 < gleki> oh my someone voted for 3
07:36 < gleki> i didnt vote
07:36 < Amnadya> Did I say something wrong? guskant seems upset :(
07:36 < zipcpi> o.o
07:37 < zipcpi> I dunno, I only ever talked to her through the mriste
07:37 < zipcpi> Maybe her zantufa is getting too much hate? *shrugs*
07:38 < gleki> what i agree with is that sumti tail and {sei} clause are described in PEG superugly
07:39 < durka42> where did you post? uanai
07:39 < Amnadya> main list
07:40 < durka42> oh about xoi/soi?
07:40 < durka42> I thought you were posting this straw poll thing
07:40 < Amnadya> yes
07:40 < Amnadya> Not yet.
07:40 < durka42> je'eju'inai
07:40 < zipcpi> durk42: lo ka ti'inmo cu ka ce'u cinmo lo mukti be lo nu lo'e dracyrxanime prenu cu klaku .iku'i na sarcu fa lo nu fatci fa lo nu klaku
07:41 < durka42> je'e
07:44 < gleki> "lerfu = lerfu ( lerfu+ / digit+ )*" wat. okay but what about {pabu}? are they lerfu?
07:44 < zipcpi> Yes
07:44 < Amnadya> go'i
07:44 < gleki> can this resulting lerfu string be used in LI?
07:44 < gleki> a question not answered in the poll
07:44 < zipcpi> ca'eda'oi leu cylyly
07:45 < gleki> zipcpi: your eulojban looks like loglan. beware of copyright infringements!
07:45 < zipcpi> What, loglan has /eu/?
07:46 < gleki> loglan: feu
07:46 < mensi> feu = in fact/actually, a discourse operator (UI).
07:46 < gleki> not necessarily UI, there were rants
07:46 < gleki> ...
07:46 < gleki> :)
07:47 < gleki> unlike in this channel
07:47 < zipcpi> How is it pronounced? [ew]?
07:47 < gleki> mi na cmima la loglo kamni
07:47 < zipcpi> Ah
07:47 < zipcpi> Eulojban {feu} = "she"
07:47 < gleki> to zo cmima malgli toi
07:48 < zipcpi> Meh, it's kinda why I made {setmima}
07:48 < zipcpi> So that there's a word specifically to talk about sets
07:48 < gleki> cmima lo te kamni
07:49 < zipcpi> That won't depend on how {cmima} is used laically
07:49 < gleki> what was that mukti wanted? beheaded bridi? let's see if i can make them
07:49 < durka42> AFAIK <feu> was ambiguous between fe,u or fe'u or fe.u and that's why we have ' now
07:49 < zipcpi> Hm
07:50 < gleki> ' didnt exist in loglan
07:50 < gleki> loglan: hu
07:50 < mensi> hu = who/whom/what, the argument interrogative. E.g., Hu fa godzi? Who will go?; Da merji hu? X is married to whom?; Hu
07:50 < mensi> fa durzo hu? Who will do what?
07:50 < gleki> fehu then?
07:50 < gleki> coi: hu fa godzi i da merji hu i hu fa durzo hu
07:50 < mensi> ma ba klama i ko'a speni ma i ma ba gafygau ma
07:51 < durka42> man, those loglygismu are painfully english-based
07:51 < gleki> iu doi la mensi
07:51 < durka42> loglan: durzo
07:51 < mensi> durzo = K do V to D with B.
07:51 < durka42> za'a na mapti zo gafygau
07:51 < zipcpi> dumza
07:51 < durka42> coi zbusufukai
07:51 < gleki> mapti no lojbo vau la'a
07:52 < durka42> ie
07:53 < gleki> e'u   yyyy zo durzo 
07:53 < gleki> sei pavmeigau co bangu
07:54 < gleki> i lo gerna ca durzo lo nu lo stedu cu cortu vau mi lo lerfu javni
08:13 < Amnadya> Okay, seems it wasn't my fault.
08:15 < Amnadya> Btw, the xoi distinction I brought up should be of interest to everyone
08:15 < Amnadya> (everyone who uses xoi)
08:16 < durka42> oh wow throwing shade on camxes there
08:16 < Amnadya> (more scope nuances, yay!)
08:16 < durka42> she really is going rogue
08:16 < durka42> ei mi tcidu piro lo mristeka'u
08:16 < Amnadya> She might be having a bad day
08:16 < durka42> happens to the best of us
08:17 < Amnadya> We're in the same boat though, many of us are trying to fix the illogical parts of Lojban
08:18 < Amnadya> .u'i se'i
08:19 < zipcpi> I saw your xoi thing but I can't remember where
08:20 < Amnadya> I just wrote it in the latest mriste post
08:20 < zipcpi> Oh yeah. It was interesting. I've never used xoi that way or seen it used that way but it seems useful
08:21 < durka42> I don't see the problem with guskant's option 1
08:21 < durka42> after reading just the first post
08:22 < zipcpi> Similarly, you can eliminate LE and move it to LOhOI saving even more rules. OI
08:22 < zipcpi> NUNUNUNUNUNU
08:23 < zipcpi> Oh the Pxoi and Nxoi?
08:23 < zipcpi> Sounds a lot like po'oi and no'oi
08:23 < durka42> huh?
08:24 < zipcpi> Except it works somewhat differently
08:24 < zipcpi> Newest selpa'i post
08:24 < zipcpi> NOhOI is even implemented into camxes
08:24 < zipcpi> exp: so'i verba cu krixa po'oi fanza
08:24 < mensi> ([{so'i BOI} verba KU] [cu {krixa <po'oi (¹CU [fanza VAU]¹) KUhOI>} VAU])
08:26 < durka42> ah I think xoi is Nxoi
08:27 < durka42> otherwise it seems to be scope-escaping
08:27 < durka42> this is a tangent though, heh
08:27 < durka42> after decrying tangents above
08:27 < zipcpi> ... I've been using it like Pxoi more often
08:27 < durka42> really?
08:28 < durka42> maybe I'm not understanding the difference
08:28 < durka42> can we give some more examples maybe
08:28 < zipcpi> {le trene cu sutra xoi pi'ai minli fei'u cacra li munono}
08:28 < durka42> well for that it doesn't matter which it is
08:28 < zipcpi> ... I keep going back to that example
08:28 < durka42> can you translate or expand it
08:28 < Amnadya> They haven othing to do with no'oi and po'oi
08:28 < zipcpi> Even though {pi'ai} is a berserk button for some
08:28 < durka42> yeah I don't know what that was about :)
08:28 < durka42> I'm fine with pi'ai
08:29 < durka42> I want to know what the example means to you
08:29  * durka42 rarely gets a response when asking this kind of question
08:29 < zipcpi> The train is quickly going at 500 miles an hour
08:29 < durka42> ui ie
08:29 < Amnadya> Pxoi is not scope escaping.
08:29 < zipcpi> While NOhOI does
08:29 < zipcpi> Yeah I get it
08:29 < Amnadya> This was @durka
08:30 < Amnadya> It's not a tangent. This thread is about xoi.
08:30 < durka42> so
08:30 < durka42> dude, zipcpi, come on
08:30 < zipcpi> So you perhaps want to change xoi vs soi so that one is Pxoi and one is Nxoi?
08:31 < zipcpi> durka42: What?
08:31 < ldlework> blah blah we need more rap
08:31 < durka42> you started a tangent!
08:31 < Amnadya> {soi} cannot be either.
08:31 < durka42> because "Pxoi" kinda looks like "po'oi" if you squint!
08:31 < durka42> what's the point
08:31 < durka42> anyway
08:31 < zipcpi> ... crap
08:31 < durka42> I was going to try to expand {so'i verba cu krixa xoi fanza}
08:31 < Amnadya> Expanding them reveals their difference yes
08:32 < zipcpi> I told you, I'm the Avatar of Chaos
08:32 < durka42> so'i da poi verba zo'u da krixa xoi fanza
08:32 < zipcpi> mi mutmaika'i lo si'o kalsa
08:32 < durka42> actually that's the wrong direction to expand
08:33 < durka42> lo su'u so'i verba cu fanza cu krixa
08:33 < durka42> which xoi am I using there?
08:33 < durka42> whichever one it is, that's my interpretation of xoi :)
08:33 < durka42> oops, I also reversed the selbri
08:33 < durka42> lo su'u so'i verba cu krixa cu fanza
08:33 < Amnadya> Hold your horses.
08:33 < durka42> je'e
08:34 < zipcpi> Sounds like Pxoi
08:34 < Amnadya> First of all, {xoi} is a normal bridi operator (Pxoi or Nxoi doesn't matter here), so {so'i} being to the left has scope over {xoi}.
08:35 < durka42> hmm true
08:35 < Amnadya> Your first one with {zo'u} was correct
08:35 < Amnadya> Now you just have to remove xoi
08:35 < durka42> so'i da poi verba zo'u da krixa xoi fanza
08:35 < Amnadya> ie
08:35 < durka42> so'i da poi verba zo'u lo nu da krixa cu fanza
08:36 < Amnadya> so'i da poi verba zo'u lo nu da krixa cu fasnu gi'e fanza  (fasnu to be safe)
08:36 < durka42> heh ok
08:36 < durka42> or stick a da'inai somewhere
08:37 < Amnadya> It's important to retain a {je} (or gi'e) somewhere
08:37 < Amnadya> in the expansion for Pxoi
08:38 < Amnadya> Because that's the difference to Nxoi, which has no {je}
08:38 < Amnadya> (It's exactly as with poi vs noi)
08:39 < durka42> well yeah
08:39 < durka42> so I get that difference
08:39 < durka42> which is about selecting vs annotating reference
08:39 < durka42> but with {xoi} the referents are... instances of the bridi?
08:39 < durka42> s/reference/referts
08:39 < fenki> durka42 meant to say: which is about selecting vs annotating referts
08:39 < durka42> s/referts/referents
08:39 < fenki> durka42 meant to say: which is about selecting vs annotating referents
08:40 < durka42> malylercu'aca'a
08:40 < Amnadya> With {je}, {poi} and {Pxoi} you make a claim about the conjunction only
08:40 < zipcpi> cu'aca'acu'aca'acu'aca'a
08:40 < durka42> so the expansion for Nxoi would be the same except gi'e => gi'u?
08:41 < Amnadya> I would use {.i}
08:41 < zipcpi> .i lau'u fanza
08:41 < durka42> so'i da poi verba zo'u lo nu da krixa cu fasnu .ibo xo'e lo nu go'i cu fanza
08:42 < durka42> er
08:42 < Amnadya> zo xo'e ua nai
08:42 < durka42> xo'e lo go'i *
08:42 < durka42> well I'm not sure how you are going to un-restrict it
08:42 < durka42> so that it doesn't refer to the entire bridi
08:42 < durka42> also, I have an inkling that the parallel is backwards and Pxoi corresponds to noi
08:43 < durka42> but I could be wrong
08:43 < Amnadya> It doesn't.
08:43 < zipcpi> zo lau'u cu sance simsa lo jugbau valsi be lo si'o tigra
08:43 < durka42> the way I understood the original example, {xoi} does not affect the set of children we are talking about
08:43 < durka42> it just notes that the situation is annoying
08:43 < zipcpi> lau'u ba citka do
08:43 < durka42> but I'm beginning to think that I was thinking about {soi}
08:44 < durka42> yeah I was definitely thinking about {soi}
08:44  * durka42 re-evaluates the example
08:44 < Amnadya> It doesn't attach to the children. {xoi} is a *bridi* relative clause. It restricts the "predicate" that the children have to satisfy
08:44 < Amnadya> They satisfy the *conjunction*
08:44 < durka42> right
08:44 < zipcpi> So {soi} is {sei}+ke'a+bridi tail?
08:44 < Amnadya> (Pxoi I mean)
08:45 < durka42> zipcpi: in semantics, yes
08:45 < durka42> Amnadya: aha you betrayed your vote :p
08:45 < zipcpi> Huh? how? :p
08:45 < durka42> Amnadya: okay I have vacillated over to liking (E)/Pxoi better
08:45 < Amnadya> But both are needed anyway.
08:46 < durka42> Nxoi seems more like {soi} to me
08:46 < durka42> unfortunately there are no other Coi left, are there
08:46 < durka42> except qoi
08:46 < Amnadya> {Nxoi} differs from {soi} in that {Nxoi} is a bridi operator. The {so'i} has scope over it, but wouldn't have scope over a {soi}
08:46 < Amnadya> Big big difference
08:47 < durka42> I didn't say it was the same
08:47 < durka42> I said it seems more like {soi}
08:47 < durka42> and for maximum utility they should be maximally different :)
08:47 < zipcpi> simlu .i kinda sorta
08:48 < zipcpi> me'ei kinda cu me'ei simlu ja milxe
08:48 < zipcpi> me'ei sorta ku ji'a go'i
08:49  * Amnadya afk
08:49 < ldlework> Has anyone here read GEB?
08:51 < durka42> mi nai
08:52 < durka42> jbo: xoi
08:52 < mensi> 9 da se tolcri: ca'emsku, cutci, fuzma'u, guglypevgri, guglyzamgri, indika, kralyma'u, xluzerma'esazri,
08:52 < mensi> ze'irsaivi
08:52 < zipcpi> lol dang
08:53 < zipcpi> {ca'emsku}?
08:53 < zipcpi> The zi'evla hyphens are so random
08:53 < durka42> it's a hack to avoid making a lujvo since ra'oi ca'e rafsi lo na se djuno be mi
08:53 < zipcpi> catke
08:53 < durka42> I mildly disapprove of those because they violate the principle of least surprise
08:53 < zipcpi> li'a mi rolrafcre
08:54 < zipcpi> m can never be a lujvo hyphen
08:54 < zipcpi> It's n that might be confusing
08:55 < durka42> m is slightly less confusing than n
08:55 < durka42> very very slightly
08:55 < durka42> consider noisy channels
08:57 < zipcpi> Apparently I use {xoi} a lot in definitions
08:57 < zipcpi> jbo: ni'ai
08:57 < mensi> cu'alvu'u = x1 cu'alni le ni'ai ke'a vujnu x2 boi x3
08:58 < zipcpi> I changed it to {le vujnu be x2 bei x3}
09:00 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/rolrafcre
09:01 < durka42> en:rolrafcre
09:01 < mensi> [< ro rafsi certu ≈ Each of affix expert] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
09:01 < mensi> rolrafcre[8827], rolrafcertu[10886], rolrafsycre[10957], rolrafsycertu[13016]
09:01 < zipcpi> mi puru'e jmina
09:02 < durka42> je'e za'a
09:03 < durka42> vlaste: XOI
09:03 < vlaste> 4 results: xoi, gi'ei, i'au, adverbi
09:03 < durka42> en: /full xoi
09:03 < mensi> 7 da se tolcri: xoi, olgoixorxoi, xoi'u, adverbi, banxu'o'i, gi'ei, i'au
09:03 < durka42> lol wat
09:04 < durka42> en: olgoixorxoi
09:04 < mensi> olgoixorxoi = x1 is an olgoi-khorkhoi/Mongolian death worm of type/variety x2 |>>>
09:04 < mensi> krtisfranks
09:04 < durka42> new favorite word
09:04 < zipcpi> lol
09:07 < zipcpi> Don't like zi'evla hyphens? {camze} :p
09:07 < zipcpi> Though we can't do that to everything
09:07 < zipcpi> It will clash
09:08 < zipcpi> Like zomza clashed with zomzi
09:08 < zipcpi> caqne
09:08 < zipcpi> X3
09:09 < zipcpi> Got a problem? Use more phonemes. Still got a problem? MORE PHONEMES
09:09 < zipcpi> And soon you'll get Ithkuil
09:10 < durka42> ithkuil: caqne
09:10 < ithkuil> caqne: P1S1/STA-c-OBL-AGG/COA/A/GRA/RPV-RPS-IFL/UNFRAMED
09:12 < zipcpi> ithkuil: eulojban
09:12 < ithkuil> eulojban: P2S2/DYN-l-ERG-UNI/ASO/U/GRA/NRM-AGC_1/5-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
09:12 < durka42> ithkuil: eulojbaq
09:12 < ithkuil> eulojbaq: P2S2/DYN-l-ERG-UNI/ASO/U/GRA/NRM-NTR_1/5-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
09:12 < durka42> ah changed from AGC to NTR naturally
09:12 < zipcpi> ithkuil: eulwujbaq
09:12 < ithkuil> eulwujbaq: PPT2-P1S3/STA-CNG-jb-OBL-UNI/COA/U/DEL/NRM-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
09:13 < zipcpi> Now the root changed
09:13 < zipcpi> ithkuil: qeunxrwnmrwinmlwu
09:13 < ithkuil> error
09:14 < zipcpi> uesai da na'e valsi fo la itku'ile
09:14 < zipcpi> .y. fi
09:15 < zipcpi> ithkuil: qeunxrönmröinmlöu
09:15 < zipcpi> ...
09:16 < zipcpi> ithkuil: eulojbaň
09:16 < ithkuil> eulojbaň: P2S2/DYN-l-ERG-UNI/ASO/U/GRA/NRM-COO_1/5-EXS-IFL/UNFRAMED
09:17 < zipcpi> ithkuil: ňeunxrönmröinmlöu
09:17 < ithkuil> error
09:17 < gleki> alta: vei pa mo
09:17 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <(¹vei pa¹) BOI> mo KU} {CU <COhE VAU>}])
09:18 < gleki> olgoixorxoi!
09:18 < gleki> ldlework: is there anything lojbanic there?
09:19 < gleki> alta: li ny pa mo
09:19 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹[{ny VEhO} pa] BOI¹) LOhO>} {CU <mo VAU>}])
09:19 < gleki> alta: li pa ny mo
09:19 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹[pa {ny VEhO}] BOI¹) LOhO>} {CU <mo VAU>}])
09:23 < zipcpi> Durka42 have you seen this? http://mw.lojban.org/papri/fancylojban_challenges
09:24 < zipcpi> Oops I replaced the wrong link
09:25 < Ilmen> "… but we'd probably need a new brivla for while-loop"
09:25 < zipcpi> Hi Ilmen
09:25 < Ilmen> zvailu
09:25 < zipcpi> lol
09:26 < zipcpi> But: Question: Can Lojban, as designed, actually handle this? Can KOhA and letteral variables be reinterpreted in an existing du'u-proposition, or does the proposition remain the same even if the variables get goi-ed to something else?
09:26 < zipcpi> en: ra'o
09:26 < mensi> ra'o = [RAhO] flag GOhA to indicate pro-assignment context updating for all pro-assigns in referenced bridi. |>>>
09:26 < mensi> officialdata
09:26 < Ilmen> That's a question I've wonder myself.
09:26 < Ilmen> I'm not sure.
09:27 < Ilmen> In the very worst case, it could be given lu-quotes, which would be interpreted at each iteration.
09:27 < zipcpi> lol
09:28 < Ilmen> ta'o coi
09:28 < Ilmen> jbo: zvailu
09:28 < mensi> zvailu = go x1 jetnu gi jetnu fa x2 gi'e ba bo zvailu fa x1 fe x2 |>>> mukti fa lo nu djica lo nu da jbobau brivo la'o
09:28 < mensi> gy. while loop .gy .i srana fa zo .ifle .e zo rapli .e zo krefu |>>> Ilmen
09:29 < Ilmen> za'a xrekursiva velski
09:29 < Ilmen> dai
09:29 < Ilmen> s/za'a/za'adai
09:29 < fenki> Ilmen meant to say: za'adai xrekursiva velski
09:31 < Ilmen> Also, if you haven't read it already, this page may interest you: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Writing_algorithms_in_Lojban
09:31 < Ilmen> You may want having a look at my second translation attempt, shown on this page.
09:32 < Ilmen> .e'i mi de'a jundi
09:32 < Ilmen> co'o
09:32 < zipcpi> Hm {gi}
09:34 <@xalbo> Does Lojban have a good way of returning tuples?
09:34 < mensi> xalbo: cu'u la'o gy.zipcpi.gy.: Nah if I added another vowel to the Eulojban class it would probably be /�/ (assigned to
09:34 < mensi> w) instead of /�/. {la .eulwjbaq.}. mi ja'a kusru lo'e se glibau | 2015-07-18T04:42:54.
09:34 < mensi> 616Z
09:34 < mensi> xalbo: cu'u la'o gy.zipcpi.gy.: And hey why not make /wu/ a valid diphthong while we're at it (it sounds like an
09:34 < mensi> exaggerated British "oh!") | 2015-07-18T04:46:19.853Z
09:35 < zipcpi> off: li pa ce'o re ce'o ci
09:35 < mensi> ([li {<pa BOI> <ce'o (¹re BOI¹)> <ce'o (¹ci BOI¹)>} LOhO] VAU)
09:35 < zipcpi> ? dunno
09:36 < zipcpi> And yeah I went ahead and added {w} and a bunch of cmavo of... somewhat limited utiliy; mostly just reassignments and bridi-tail hate :p
09:36 <@xalbo> I'm thinking that the proposed form for "while" there doesn't work, for the reasons you stated. But I feel like there's a functional version that would work.
09:38 <@xalbo> Take x3 and feed it into x2. Feed the result into x1. if the result of that is true, then you're done. Else do x1(x2(x2(x3)), etc.
09:38 <@xalbo> I don't know. When I think in Lojban I tend to think in functional/recursive paradigms anyway.
09:38 < zipcpi> Is there a way to define a while loop recursively
09:39 <@xalbo> I'm not sure there's a reason to, really.
09:39 < zipcpi> Well, one good reason might be what I said about "informal algorithms"
09:39 < zipcpi> I believe while-loops are easier on human parsing for informal algorithms than recursive functions
09:41 <@xalbo> That makes some sense.
09:41 < zipcpi> Of course, for the ultimate in recursion... there is the Towers of Hanoi solution algorithm
09:41 < zipcpi> Well not really ultimate
09:41 < zipcpi> But each one branches twice
09:44 <@xalbo> x1 is the sequence of moves that move the right discs from tower x2 (sequence of ring sizes) to tower x3 (sequence of ring sizes) using temporary storage tower x3 (sequence of ring sizes).
09:44 < zipcpi> lol
09:47 <@xalbo> Great, I don't even know how to get "the empty sequence" as a sumti to check the base case.
09:47 < zipcpi> Hahaha
09:48 < latro`a_> can you get the empty set?
09:48 < zipcpi> Curtis has {zai'o}, though I'm not sure how you disambiguate it
09:48 < latro`a_> .i ca'e no da cmima ko'a .i lo porsi be fi ko'a cu ...
09:48 < latro`a_> {no da cmima ko'a} defines {ko'a} (provided we've agreed on extensionality of sets)
09:49 < latro`a_> (and provided da can't get screwed over by universe of discourse adjustments)
09:49 < zipcpi> lo setmima be noda
09:49 < zipcpi> Right
09:49 <@xalbo> fo'a ko'a ko'e ko'i ca'ei ga fo'a ko'a vu'i zai'o du gi ...
09:51 <@xalbo> I need to define more primitives first.
09:51 < zipcpi> Mm...
09:52 <@xalbo> Or not...
10:05 <@xalbo> http://pastebin.com/mR37Pup8
10:05 <@xalbo> The actual move is a little bit of a cheat, and I'm not sure of the types, or that I didn't get some of the arguments backwards.
10:05 < zipcpi> ce'ai, not ca'ei
10:07 < zipcpi> Once you get that fixed feel free to add to the fancylojban challenges page
10:11 <@xalbo> Thanks!
10:12 < durka42> hmm I should add towers of hanoi as an example in my lisp dialect
10:12 < durka42> currently I only have factorial and fibonacci examples
10:12 < durka42> like 6 variants each
10:15 < durka42> la .camxes. ta'e co'u kibjorne ca lo cabdei Nxoi fanza mi
10:15 < durka42> crap, they are both necessary aren't they
10:15 < durka42> maybe we need a UI
10:15 < durka42> then we can nix noi and ne and no'oi as well!
10:15 < durka42> compositionality FTW
10:16 < zipcpi> lol
10:16 < durka42> no seriously
10:16 < zipcpi> And {neu}
10:16 < durka42> well not serious about removing {noi}
10:16 < zipcpi> Maybe it could be {neu} :p
10:16 < durka42> but a UI for restrictiveness would solve the Pxoi/Nxoi problem
10:17 < durka42> and then noi gets defined in terms of {poi ui'i'i}
10:17 < zipcpi> Or {ueu} :p
10:17 < durka42> or the other way around
10:17 < durka42> I'm talking about a real lojban cmavo!
10:17 < durka42> :p
10:17 < zipcpi> lol
10:17 <@xalbo> I should write the problem more clearly, but I'm lazy.
10:17 < durka42> Eulojbaq is for unrealistic if-we-didn't-have-usage-history proposals :)
10:17 <@xalbo> And that's not the interesting part :)
10:20 < zipcpi> {ta'o}?
10:20 < zipcpi> {poi ta'o} = {noi}?
10:21 < zipcpi> I dunno. {noi} is a bit like parenthetical statements
10:21 < zipcpi> But might not be exactly the same
10:23 < ldlework> Its a penultimate assertion
10:24 < ldlework> err that's the wrong word
10:24 < ldlework> Its a 'secondary' assertion.
10:25 < zipcpi> Sounds a bit like {ta'o} but I might be wrong
10:26 < ldlework> ta'o is a metalinguistic force indicator
10:26 < ldlework> noi results in a conjunction
10:27 < ldlework> mi prami lo bruna noi gleki => da zo'u da bruna je se prami be mi .i je da gleki
10:29 < gleki> So for mekso I reimplemented powerful {li}
10:29 < gleki> now im reimplementing sumti_tail, sei-clause as modifications of bridi
10:30 < gleki> alta: lo ge camo gi mo cu mo
10:30 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
10:30 < gleki> O_0
10:31 < durka42> yeah noi is basically another sentence
10:31 < durka42> so maybe UI isn't powerful enough
10:32 < durka42> on the other hand po'o is in UI so
10:32 < zipcpi> I'm still not exactly sure how {ta'o} would be wrong, or what else {ta'o} might mean in that context
10:33 < ldlework> durka42: hehe
10:33 < ldlework> zipcpi: its an operator on the discourse
10:33 < durka42> zipcpi: yeah you might be right
10:33 < durka42> we would just want to specify it
10:33 < durka42> well
10:33 < durka42> I dunno
10:34 < ldlework> Its appearance is of no logical consequence
10:34 < durka42> would it make sense to be able to restrict the domain of referents while simultaneous claiming that the restriction is unimportant
10:34 < ldlework> Its like introducing a "xu" into a sentence
10:34 < ldlework> What's the important of a restriction if not to restrict the domain of referents?
10:34 < durka42> so'i verba poi krixa cu fanza
10:34 < durka42> so'i verba poi ta'o krixa cu fanza
10:34 < durka42> ldlework: right that's my thinking
10:35 < durka42> is there any?
10:35 < zipcpi> THe thing is {poi} is defined as "restrictive", vs {noi}
10:35 < durka42> right
10:35 < ldlework> Well it depends on whether or not you're trying to prove the truth-value of descriptions along with the surface proposition
10:36 < ldlework> Whether or not "the restriction is important" is the difference of whether or not the description appears in a logical expansion
10:36 < durka42> actually I do think {ta'o} has a slightly different meaning
10:36 < durka42> because {ta'o nai} is "returning to main point"
10:36 < durka42> so I think this UI would be different
10:36 < zipcpi> Hm
10:36 < gleki> alta: lo ge camo gi mo cu mo
10:36 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <lo (¹ge [ca mo] gi mo¹) KU>} {cu <mo VAU>}])
10:36 < gleki> alta: sei ge mo gi mo
10:36 < mensi> (NIhO [I {sei <CU (¹ge mo gi mo¹)> SEhU}] [CU {COhE VAU}])
10:36 < ldlework> broda ko'a noi brode => da zo'u da se broda
10:37 < zipcpi> en: noi
10:37 < mensi> noi = [NOI] non-restrictive relative clause; attaches subordinate bridi with incidental information. |>>>
10:37 < mensi> officialdata
10:37 < ldlework> broda ko'a poi brode => da zo'u da se broda je brode
10:37 < zipcpi> "incidental" / "incidentally"
10:37 < durka42> so'i verba poi ta'o krixa cu fanza .i ta'onai mi xagji
10:37 < durka42> it's more like {fu'e sei na'e te tavla} :p
10:37 < durka42> vlaste: incidentally
10:37 < vlaste> 10 results: ra'unai, ne, noi, no'u, ra'u, ra'ucu'i, noi'a, no'oi, jibri, liste
10:37 < zipcpi> ma'oi UI kalsa
10:38 < durka42> ie
10:38 < durka42> ra'u?
10:38 < zipcpi> ra'unai? o.o
10:38 < gleki> oi'oi = oh-my-god relative clause ; attaches subordinate bridi with ACCIDENTAL information
10:38 < durka42> lol
10:38 < zipcpi> ui'au'ei'oi'oi = Complaint about the disordered state of attitudinals
10:39 < gleki> hey, havent i fixed them
10:39 < zipcpi> lol
10:39 < zipcpi> Well, "we", but not completely, there's still evidentials
10:39 < zipcpi> And {toi'e}
10:39 < gleki> although ithink that for new UI (interjection roots) we need a new name not to confuse with the previous UI. I think OI is a fine name for the new selmaho.
10:40 < zipcpi> lol
10:40 < zipcpi> u'isai
10:41 < durka42> UI42ab✗*
10:41 < gleki> how do you want to organize UI2 then if those are evidentials you mentioned?
10:41 < zipcpi> Hm I'm not sure. The main problem with UI2 is whether they should affect UI1... probably not unless modified with {toi'e}
10:42 < durka42> ie
10:43 < gleki> they shouldnt imo
10:45 < ldlework> What do you mean affect?
10:45 < gleki> how can one feel {ui toi'e ba'a}?
10:45 < durka42> whether {ie ca'e} implies {ie toi'e ca'e} or not
10:46 < durka42> ui toi'e ba'a = mi kanpe lo nu mi gleki ?
10:46 < zipcpi> By the way I use {uo} for "Finally" / "At last"
10:47 < zipcpi> zabna ji mabla
10:47 < gleki> {mi kanpe lo nu mi pu gleki} or {mi kanpe lo nu mi ba gleki} ?
10:47 < gleki> jb: uo
10:47 < mensi> uo = uo [interjection] — Voila! (completion), uo nai — incompleteness
10:47 < mensi> :uo mi facki lo danfu — Voila, I found a solution!
10:47 < mensi> :uo nai do tu na ru'e darxi — Oh, you almost hit it.
10:47 < mensi> :Related words: mulno, mansa, fanmo, snada
10:47 < durka42> ya that's what uo means
10:47 < durka42> gleki: or ca. not specified
10:47 < gleki> "finally", is more like {za'oku broda uo}
10:48 < gleki> durka42: it's a drawback. fix that by adding tenses
10:48 < durka42> mi kanpe lo nu mi gleki .i ku'i mi cinmo lo ka badri .i ma nabmi mi
10:48 < durka42> no just use {sei} and cinmo selbri in that case
10:49 < ldlework> (zipcpi any progress on Speech Acts? (I finished it again))
10:50 < zipcpi> Sigh... I really need to catch up on some things...
10:51 < ldlework> In the edition of GEB I have, there is a long preface by the author
10:51 < ldlework> In it, he goes on for quite a while regarding his fascination with translation
10:51 < ldlework> Such as the difficulty in translating GEB to french and the many plays on English words and the difficulty there
10:52 < ldlework> He mentions that he wrote a book on the facinating realm of translation and I had the thought that it would be a very nice gift for selpa'i
10:52 < gleki> Actually previous generation Lojbanists read it
10:52 < ldlework> ua
10:53 < ldlework> gleki: do you recall any impressions?
10:53 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/G%C3%B6del,_Escher,_Bach
10:53 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/G%C3%B6del_Numbers_and_Lojban
10:54 < ldlework> Oh I thought you meant the book he wrote about translation
11:00 < zipcpi> Ugh I think I'll define "illocutionary", "perlocutionary", and "locutionary" all as frame LOJBO
11:00 < zipcpi> x1 pertains to "concept" in aspect x2
11:00 < zipcpi> It's the vaguest way to define a word, but sometimes that's the only awy
11:05 < durka42> ldlework: so who's going to translate GEB to lojban :)
11:07 < gleki> copyright
11:08 < durka42> ight
11:19 < ldlework> zipcpi: what
11:21 < zipcpi> Well, that's kinda how most adjectives with a complex meaning are defined
11:21 < ldlework> But none of those words have anything to do with defining concepts
11:21 < zipcpi> Like cultural "adjectives"
11:21 < zipcpi> They are "adjectives" that "pertain" to a certain concept in some way
11:22 < zipcpi> I just want to make tanru out of them
11:22 < ldlework> zipcpi: I thought you were suggesting a definition for one of those words or something
11:22 < zipcpi> Oh
11:22 < zipcpi> I meant the definition of the Lojban equivalents
11:23 < ldlework> Would never be something like "x1 pertains to "conept"
11:23 < zipcpi> It's the simplest way to convert a complex adjective into a Lojban word. We can think of what lujvo to make with it later
11:24 < ldlework> zipcpi: I mean, "x1 pertains to "concept" in aspect x2" is not a good definition for "illocutionary" "perlocutionary" or "locutionary"
11:24 < ldlework> If you're saying something else, sorry for misunderstanding.
11:24 < zipcpi> And what else could it be? If we have to describe every single actor within those concepts, we end up with a kurtynomvla
11:25 < ldlework> zipcpi: Those words mean specific discrete things. They are not so general as to require such a floaty unsubstantial definition.
11:25 < ldlework> They are technical terms.
11:26 < zipcpi> Yes, but they relate so many concepts that it's best to explain them in terms of a bridi with {ka}
11:26 < zipcpi> Not having terbri for every single actor
11:26 < durka42> xu do ralte lo mupli
11:26 < ldlework> I don't understand why you think lojban definition for "illocutionary" is vastly complex
11:26 < ldlework> or has many "actors"
11:26 < durka42> za'a da'asnu lo mucti .u'i
11:26 < ldlework> What do you think that illocutionary means?
11:27 < zipcpi> I'm just going by the dict definition
11:27 < zipcpi> ""pertaining to a linguistic act performed by a speaker in producing an utterance, as suggesting, warning, promising, or requesting."
11:27 < ldlework> And so why do you think that definition implies many argument places?
11:27 < ldlework> x1 is the illocutionary force intended by x2 in communicating utterance x3
11:27 < zipcpi> Because we already have a four-place brivla, {skuselzu'e}
11:28 < durka42> vlaste: skuselzu'e
11:28 < vlaste> skuselzu'e = x1 is a speech act, performed by speaker x2 to listener/audience x3, for purpose x4
11:28 < ldlework> That is a bad definition
11:29 < ldlework> The x4 is the speech act
11:29 < zipcpi> <.<
11:29 < ldlework> ca lo nu pilno zo xu ku ma do illocutionary
11:30 < ldlework> And the listener shouldn't be a part of it
11:30 < ldlework> Superflous information
11:30 < rlpowell>  lojban.org is going up ad down because testing a backup fix.
11:30 < zipcpi> It's informed by the root words
11:30 < ldlework> And doesn't even include the actual utterance, wtf
11:30 < ldlework> zipcpi: makes sense
11:30 < zipcpi> jvojva and all... I don't know how to define else to define it
11:30 < ldlework> indeed
11:30 < ldlework> what?
11:31 < zipcpi> Nevermind
11:31 < durka42> je'e camgusmis
11:31 < zipcpi> It doesn't need to, because the utterence can be {lo nu cusku X}
11:32 < zipcpi> It's within the x1
11:34 <@xalbo> If -sku- is already in there, then making someone get to {lo nu cusku} to fill the cusku2 seems pointlessly complicated.
11:34 < zipcpi> Where else to put the terbri though?
11:35 < zipcpi> That's the problem with lujvo... sometimes we can't include all the terbri we want, or we end up with extremely complicated place structures T.T
11:36 < rlpowell> gleki: You awake?
11:36 < rlpowell> Can people see if the site is super slow right now?
11:37 < durka42> I mean, it's working...
11:37 < zipcpi> Maybe between x2 and x3
11:37 <@xalbo> {lo nu ce'u ce'u ce'u ce'u cusku cu se zukte ce'u ce'u} seems like the right basis, once you align the right {ce'u}s with each other and eliminate the ones that don't matter.
11:37 < zipcpi> So that x2 ~ x4 are all cusku1 cusku2 cusku3
11:37 < ldlework> There doesn't have to be a problem with lujvo
11:38 < zipcpi> $x_1$ is a speech act, characterized by speaker $x_2$ uttering text $x_3$ to listener/audience $x_4$, for purpose $x_5$
11:38 < ldlework> I just don't see how x1 and x4 are different
11:38 < zipcpi> x1 is the act itself, the x5 is the end goal
11:39 < ldlework> What's the difference?
11:39 < zipcpi> Same difference as the difference between zukte2 and zukte3
11:39 < gleki> rlpowell: here
11:39 < ldlework> zipcpi: zukte2 here is the utterting of text
11:40 < zipcpi> Yes, the "act" itself
11:40 < ldlework> That means that all speech acts are defined by the same act
11:40 < ldlework> the utterance of speech
11:40 < ldlework> which is wrong
11:40 < zipcpi> Then I don't know what is right
11:40 < durka42> oi, those definitions for lotkuti and perlokuti...
11:40 <@xalbo> I probably came in too late; what is the real goal we're attempting to achieve? What's the finti3 for this whole word?
11:41 < ldlework> zukte2 should not manifest in the definition, because zukte2 is implictly filled by cusku'ing text.
11:41 < durka42> you gotta provide examples with definitions that vague
11:41 < zipcpi> I just want to make tanru with them
11:41 < zipcpi> I don't know exactly what they mean T.T
11:41 < ldlework> They are very simple concepts
11:42 < ldlework> What the speaker intends
11:42 < zipcpi> Simple to you...
11:42 <@xalbo> ldlework: I think what zipcpi wants is x1=lo nu x2 cusku x3 x4 cu se zukte x2 x5.
11:42 < ldlework> And what the listener concludes
11:42 < ldlework> That's all it is.
11:42 < ldlework> then you need nuncusku in there somewhere
11:43 < zipcpi> Yes, I *could* make it nunskukezyselzu'e, but I hate that sort of lujvo
11:43 < durka42> zipcpi: then maybe crowdsource the definitions somewhere instead?
11:43 < ldlework> x1 is the illocutionary force (intended cognitive result) of x2 as expressed in text x3
11:43 < durka42> instead of coming here all defeated "gosh I guess I just have to do define them this way" :/
11:44 < durka42> JVS is a terrible discussion platform if you haven't noticed
11:44 < zipcpi> That one is a separate brivla, ldlework. There's also "illocutionary act"
11:44 <@xalbo> ldlework: Could you provide a concrete example with all three of those places filled?
11:45 < ldlework> ma illocutionery do lo se du'u do prami mi
11:45 < Ilmen> .e'u zo .itlokuti
11:45 < Ilmen> noi ca su'o da mi pilno
11:45 < ldlework> ma .itlokuti fi zo xu
11:45 <@xalbo> {ma} feels like cheating; what would a possible answer be? I'm trying to understand the type.
11:46 < ldlework> You can provide the name of a force like "Question"
11:46 < ldlework> Or you can describe the constitutive rules that allow for question asking
11:46 <@xalbo> No, I don't think I can.
11:46 < durka42> .u'i
11:47 < ldlework> lo nu do spuda cu .itlokuti mi zo xu
11:47 < gleki> i think i will redefine {incita} based on {bridi} definition
11:47 < zipcpi> Well, that's the thing. It's like how {lojbo} magically attaches to {bangu} to describe {jbobau} while having the same structure as {bangu}
11:48 < Ilmen> How about "x1 (relation between x2 and x4) is the illocution (intended result relation) of x2 expressing x3 (text) to addressee x4"?
11:48 < zipcpi> Similarly these words simply import the concept, then we qualify it with another word. If you don't like tanru, we can make specific lujvo later
11:48 < ldlework> Ilmen: I really don't think that the listener is involved.
11:48 < gleki> for "illocution" I suggest (strangely to here that from la gleki) something purely Lojbanic like {mu'umgu},{kreivi}. since you are creating something that isnt specified nice in natlangs.
11:48 < gleki> jbofuvi i mean
11:48 < ldlework> I don't see how illocutionary isn't nicely specified in say, English
11:49 < Ilmen> Do you think the addressee is irrelevant to the utterance purpose?
11:49 < gleki> no, not jbofuvi
11:49 < ldlework> Ilmen: yes
11:49 < ldlework> Its superflous
11:49 < ldlework> And doesn't change our understanding of the intention
11:49 < gleki> ldlework: i mean the terms themselves in their place structure
11:49 < ldlework> Wellllllll
11:49 < Ilmen> Is the speaker relevant to the illocution?
11:49 < ldlework> I guess you can say something, say during a speech, and care to illicit different perlocutionary effect in different subsets of your listeners
11:50 < ldlework> Ilmen: I'm convinced.
11:51 < ldlework> It terms of an adjective I guess you just change it to something like
11:51 < ldlework> x1 is related to the desires of speaker x2 expressing x3 to x4
11:52 < ldlework> without saying what those desires are
11:52 < ldlework> But it seems like, that is kind of the transformation tanru do implicitly
11:53 < ldlework> "to-do-with" or "kind-of"
11:53 < Ilmen> x1 srana me'ei .itloku'i
11:53 < ldlework> So you'd just use the formal definition in a tanru and get a srana sense by default
11:53 < Ilmen> ~ x1 srana lo si'o .itlokuti
11:53 < ldlework> It seems strange to need literal adjectives in lojban
11:53 < ldlework> and adverbs
11:53 < ldlework> since we have a grammar for it
11:54 < ldlework> just verbs and grammar
11:54 < zipcpi> If you really want to front "purpose", we could have {skuterzu'e} as well. But I won't know how to define it.
11:55 < Ilmen> nunsku terzu'e
11:55 < ldlework> zipcpi: its just that other than a name, there really isn't anything that *is* a speech act
11:55 < ldlework> you have questions, assetions, promises and so on, which a words that point to protocols
11:56 < ldlework> s/which a/which are
11:56 < fenki> ldlework meant to say: you have questions, assetions, promises and so on, which are words that point to protocols
11:56 < ldlework> Like, if you want to define the "kind of thing" that is a Touchdown, how do you do that?
11:56 < ldlework> How do you define the thing that is both a Touchdown and an Offsides Violation?
11:56 < zipcpi> That sounds like a job for zai'e
11:57 < ldlework> They are both sets of constitutive rules.
11:57 < ldlework> Beyond designating a name to those sets of rules, they are not substantiated.
11:57 < durka42> you could write the rules down though
11:57 < durka42> in any language
11:57 < ldlework> durka42: right, but what is the verb
11:57 < durka42> if you have enough patience
11:57 < zipcpi> I dunno, one of the things that I kinda sorta intend to do, is to translate the rules of a game
11:57 < ldlework> that denotes the kind of thing
11:57 < ldlework> that is both a Touchdown and an Offsides Violation
11:57 < ldlework> other than x1 is the set of rules that allow for...
11:57 < durka42> er
11:58 < durka42> are there such things?
11:58 < durka42> seems like if you are offsides you can't make a touchdown
11:58 < durka42> but I dunno anything about football
11:58 < ldlework> What... we're talking about classifying those things
11:58 < ldlework> Not how they relate
11:58 < ldlework> Or how they actually word
11:58 < ldlework> work
11:58 < durka42> anyway, I would say "by describing what it is" but I don't get the question
11:58 < ldlework> well that's the answer I was looking for
11:58 < durka42> .u'i
11:58 < ldlework> The only property both of them share, is that they are allowed for by constitutive rules.
11:59 < durka42> yes
11:59 < durka42> a ciste
11:59 < ldlework> The only way to say what a constitutive rule is, is to state the rules that it consists of
11:59 < durka42> {ciste}
11:59 < ldlework> Or provide the name for it
12:00 < ldlework> Right, so now, how would you define the verb "to touchdown"
12:00 <@xalbo> A touchdown is a kind of play (which is itself a kind of event).
12:00 < zipcpi> That one would be defined by the rules of the game itself
12:00 < ldlework> xalbo: the point is, a touchdown is not defined by restrictive rules
12:00 < ldlework> IE, you cannot perform a touchdown outside the context of a football game
12:00 <@xalbo> x1 (play) results in a touchdown for team x2 (with some yadda about the match etc)
12:01 < durka42> "to catch the ball in the end zone during a football game"? (+ whatever other rules of football I'm forgetting)
12:01 < ldlework> This seems to presuppose knowledge of touchdowns
12:01 < zipcpi> Like I said, to define it, one would have to define the rules of the game
12:02 <@xalbo> Or, less of a name, "x1 is an offensive play that ends with team x2 possessing the ball and entering their opponent's end zone, (and isn't a foul, and all the rest of the rules)"
12:02 < ldlework> zipcpi: that's a tautology though
12:02 < zipcpi> It isn't
12:02 < ldlework> since touchdowns are a rule of the game
12:02 < ldlework> if we replace the word touchdown with "rule of the game"
12:02 < ldlework> you have produced a tautology
12:03 < zipcpi> The rules of the game itself define what a touchdown is. If we translated all the rules into Lojban, it would say exactly what the touchdown-brivla means
12:03 < ldlework> the verb "to touchdown" either denotes events which qualify as touchdowns
12:03 < ldlework> or it denotes the rules that constitute a touchdown
12:03 < ldlework> That's the problem
12:03 < Ilmen> X touchdown  vs  E nu X touchdown
12:04 < durka42> you want x1 is a touchdown under rules x2?
12:04 < ldlework> So either your illocutionary force verb, will either simply denote "things" which qualify as an illocutionary force or it will denote thos eforces
12:04 <@xalbo> "the verb "to touchdown" either denotes events which qualify as touchdowns" -- Yes, I don't see why that's a problem.
12:04 <@xalbo> The verb {gerku} denotes animals that qualify as gerku.
12:04 < ldlework> Right but what constitutes things such as constitutive rules
12:04 < ldlework> IE, things that qualitfy and can be denotes as examples of such
12:05 < ldlework> Touchdown is like Question
12:06 < durka42> so... "x1 is illocutionarily a question"?
12:06 < ldlework> Well we have a word for Question
12:06 < durka42> right
12:06 < ldlework> It denotes something that qualifies under the rules of asking a question, but it does not tell us what a question is
12:06 < durka42> so zipcpi just wants to say {lotkuti preti}
12:06 < durka42> what a Question is... lo ka lotkuti preti cu ka ...
12:07 < ldlework> Right what what is the verb, that denotes the thing that is a question.
12:07 < ldlework> Other than a retrograde denotion of it being a question
12:07 < durka42> you lost me
12:07 < durka42> too many big words
12:07 < ldlework> IE, if, as a young person in lojbanistan, if you want to know what a question is, what it means, how do you perform a question, how do you construct something for which preti is true
12:07 < durka42> pray take pity
12:08 < zipcpi> Like I said, it's like {lojbo}, it is meant to bring in the semantic so that we can define tanru or lujvo based on them, nothing more
12:08 < ldlework> Which verb's definition do you look at?
12:08 < Ilmen> .itlokuti mi lu do ze'u na jai se ganse li'u fa lo ka brireisku lo ka se zvati
12:08 < durka42> preti?
12:08 < ldlework> preti just tells you what things *are* questions
12:08 < zipcpi> But I downvoted myself in case you want to crowdsource some better definitions
12:08 < ldlework> it doesn't teach you how to figure out which things the predicate is true of
12:08 < ldlework> or how to create preti1's yourself
12:08 < durka42> jbo:preti
12:08 < mensi> preti = x1 vlapoi gi'e se cusku x3 fi x4 tezu'e lo nu ri x1 da jungau ku gi'e selsmu lo srana be x2 je nibli be lo du'u
12:08 < mensi> x3 brireisku da x4
12:09 < durka42> actually it does
12:09 < durka42> if you know lojban
12:09 < durka42> whichi s the problem with all dictionaries :p
12:09 < durka42> they are all sepulka
12:09 < ldlework> Okay I didn't realize that the lojban definition actually provided some semblance of how questions are defined in LP
12:09 < zipcpi> ?
12:09 < ldlework> So
12:09 < durka42> we could back translate that to english but it'd be more confusing probably
12:10 < Ilmen> LP ki'a
12:10 < durka42> for us mortals who use the dictionary as a translator
12:10 < ldlework> language-philosophy
12:10 < Ilmen> je'e
12:10 < Ilmen> banpijyske
12:11 < ldlework> is-illocutionary1 can only provide the actual intended force desired
12:11 < niftg> xu nu banlanli
12:11 < durka42> {preti} is recursively defined...
12:11 < ldlework> imo
12:11 < durka42> also that "ri x1 da jungau" seems wrong
12:11 < Ilmen> Where is there recursion?
12:11 < zipcpi> {brireisku}?
12:11 < durka42> Ilmen: breireisku
12:11 < Ilmen> brireisku is not based on preti.
12:12 < durka42> jungau2 is a person but x1 of preti is a question...
12:12 < durka42> oh okay
12:12 < durka42> jbo:brireisku
12:12 < mensi> brireisku [< bridi preti cusku ≈ Bridi* preti* cusku*] = x1 cpedu fi x3 fe lo ka jungau x1 lo du'u x2 brije'u ma
12:12 < mensi> kau
12:12 < durka42> there's the speech act
12:12 < zipcpi> Ah... one of Ilmen's magic untranslatable predicates, naturally :p
12:12 < Ilmen> brireisku = to ask (on of the meanings)
12:13 < ldlework> We should go through and create LP based definitions of the speech-acts
12:13 < ldlework> And encodify all the rules
12:13 < Ilmen> It is for indirect quote asking.
12:13 < ldlework> sounds boring as hell, nevermind
12:14 < Ilmen> He asked "Do you see me?" = reisku lu xu do mi viska li'u
12:14 < zipcpi> The more pertinent question is how to translate the word "force" in "illocutionary force"
12:14 < Ilmen> He asked whether I see him = brireisku lo ka jei mi vo'a viska
12:14 < Ilmen> .i .e'e karbi
12:15 < zipcpi> And whether any tanru based on {itlokuti broda} is enough, or whether we want {itlokuti} to *be* illocutionary force, and build the rest of the concepts from there
12:15 < durka42> zo bapli li'a
12:15 < Ilmen> ask + quote marks ---> reisku;   ask + question word ---> brireisku
12:16 < ldlework> What's interesting to me is that preti denotes text uttered with specific illocutionary force
12:16 < ldlework> it denotes an instance
12:16 < ldlework> But if you wanted to answer a question such as "ma itlokuti fi go'e"
12:17 < ldlework> You could never answer with a description denoting _a question_
12:17 < durka42> lo si'o preti
12:17 < Ilmen> A preti (question sentence) may have another illocution that requesting information, for example if it is a rethorical question.
12:17 < ldlework> That's what I was about to get at is that
12:17 < ldlework> we almost need a way to refer to predicates themselves
12:17 < durka42> the idea of a question/Question ... lo si'o preti
12:17 < ldlework> And this reminds me very deeply of modern discussions of indefinite descriptions
12:17 < zipcpi> Crap... bapli... now that's a problem-word. The problem is that it's about "forcing" someone to do something, which is a semantic that might not be desired when we say "force"
12:17 < latro`a_> what do you mean a way to refer to predicates? we have that already
12:18 < ldlework> If you say so
12:18 < latro`a_> ka is the longhand, si'o is the shorthand
12:18 < latro`a_> unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean
12:18 < ldlework> Really, does that refer to the predicate itself?
12:18 < latro`a_> yes
12:18 < ldlework> In what sense do you mean?
12:18 < Ilmen> You have {me'ei}, too
12:18 < latro`a_> me'ei is another shorthand, yes
12:18 < ldlework> Because "referring to predicates" is a expression that means many things
12:18 < latro`a_> lo ka ce'u nelci ce'u is "the predicate "x1 likes x2""
12:19 < Ilmen> me'ei citka = the concept/predicate of "X eats Y"
12:19 < durka42> zipcpi: I was joking about zo bapli .u'i
12:19 < durka42> zipcpi: it's much closer to terzu'e, isn't it?
12:19 < ldlework> What verb describes a "lo me'ei broda"
12:19 < latro`a_> me'ei broda cu ka broda
12:19 < Ilmen> me'ei is a LE
12:19 < ldlework> So we have no verb
12:19 < Ilmen> (predicate article)
12:19 < ldlework> Ilmen: ua
12:19 < Ilmen> si'o citka kei
12:19 < ldlework> je'e
12:19 < latro`a_> sure we do; it's an abstractor
12:19 < durka42> si'o
12:20 < zipcpi> durka42: The problem is that I want some predicate that can describe the thing that goes into bapli1 without the "force someone to do something" semantic
12:20 < ldlework> si'o isn't a predicate
12:20 < zipcpi> Like "force of nature"
12:20 < ldlework> NU are not predicates
12:20 < latro`a_> si'o itself isn't a predicate, but it's a predicate builder
12:20 < ldlework> So what is the verb that describes all predicates constructed from abstractions?
12:20 < zipcpi> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/force?s=t
12:20 < latro`a_> what do you mean exactly?
12:20 < zipcpi> Seems to be #4
12:21 < latro`a_> what is the property that all abstractors have in common?
12:21 < latro`a_> or all predicate abstractors?
12:21 < zipcpi> su'umdu?
12:21 < ldlework> latro`a_: what predicate is true and only true of all predicates that can be constructed from abstractions.
12:21 < zipcpi> I made that word quite recently lol
12:21 < latro`a_> any abstractions or just function abstractions?
12:21 < durka42> any predicate can be constructed from abstractions
12:22 < ldlework> latro`a_: any abstraction
12:22 < durka42> zipcpi: jitro then?
12:22 < Ilmen> kai'u is an abstractor.
12:22 < latro`a_> so {lo nu broda} does the thing you have in mind?
12:22 < ldlework> right
12:22 < zipcpi> xlura ja jitro ja... "affect"
12:22 < latro`a_> that's a word we don't have, as far as I know
12:22 < ldlework> latro`a_: fair enough
12:22 < zipcpi> Problem is that if we put enough jas together we'd want a new word
12:23 < latro`a_> I've never needed it, but I would probably need it to teach a small child the language
12:23 < latro`a_> well, not to get them to communicate
12:23 < ldlework> en: astrato
12:23 < mensi> astrato = x1 is a grammatical abstraction of type x2 |>>> All Lojban constructs can be divided either to astrato/
12:23 < mensi> naly'astrato or to bridi, fasnu, selsku, namcu, dacti, gunma |>>> gleki
12:23 < Ilmen> {bu'a} is the word you need.
12:23 < zipcpi> Ilmen: lol
12:23 < zipcpi> See jonse
12:23 < latro`a_> but to *teach* it in the sense of what you study in the early school years
12:23 < ldlework> latro`a_: I think I understand you
12:23 < zipcpi> My Lojban definition is the best definition (xo'o)
12:24 < latro`a_> but apparently gleki made the thing
12:24 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/jonse
12:24 < ldlework> Okay so do answer the question "ma itloki fi zo xu" you might say "lo si'o preti" ? It doesn't seem to fit.
12:24 < durka42> that is exactly what I would say
12:24 < Ilmen> lo ka brireisku
12:24 < ldlework> Is the concept of questions, the actual intended force?
12:24 < durka42> or lo si'o jetrei
12:25 < zipcpi> Look if you hate my words I'll just add a -kai to them. Ilmen's favorite suffix
12:25 < latro`a_> zo itloki mo
12:25 < durka42> {itloki} sounds like {itku'ile} lol
12:25 < ldlework> But is your intended perlocutionary force in your listener The Concept of Questions?
12:25 < zipcpi> Then {itlokuti} can be defined in a more specific manner
12:25 < Ilmen> "illocution" @ latro`a
12:25 < latro`a_> it's not really "concept"
12:25 < latro`a_> that's a bad english gloss
12:25 < ldlework> Still
12:25 < latro`a_> (si'o doesn't match the ma'oste anymore anyway)
12:25 < ldlework> Even if you say something more advanced
12:25 < ldlework> like
12:25 < durka42> I don't understand the objection sorry
12:25 < latro`a_> (ka does, sorta)
12:25 < durka42> I haven't read Speech Acts
12:26 < ldlework> You defer this way a lot but I don't think you need specialized knowledge to answer the question
12:26 < ldlework> Its a typing question
12:26 < latro`a_> I'd need to know what sort of thing itloki1 wants
12:26 < durka42> ldlework: I didn't understand the words
12:26 < durka42> "perlocutioary force"
12:26 < ldlework> latro`a_: that's what we've been trying to find out
12:26 < durka42> what's wrong with the answer {lo si'o jetrei}
12:26 < Ilmen> I've only read that one -- http://online.sfsu.edu/kbach/spchacts.html   Indeed it certainly has nothing to do in length in comparison with the book of the same name.
12:27 < ldlework> durka42: the actual result in your listener, intended or not
12:27 < durka42> if you say {xu} then you'd better intend the listener to hear a question
12:27 < latro`a_> durka42, sure, that's what it *means*, but what is one of those
12:27 < ldlework> durka42: What is the intended cognitive effect you wish to instil in your listener by asking them a question.
12:27 < durka42> I would like them to tell me whether what I asked is true or not
12:27 < ldlework> I don't want an event that describes the effect
12:27 < ldlework> I want a thing that denotes the effect
12:28 < latro`a_> I don't think you two are using the word the same way, then
12:28 < durka42> which word, heh
12:28 < rlpowell> gleki / others: So it turns out that something like 3/4 of our database backup was giant cache tables in mediawiki.
12:28 < rlpowell> That we don't need to backup.
12:28 < rlpowell> So.
12:28 < ldlework> latro`a_: more like, I think it is easy to provide a description of what is meant rather than to produce words that denote them
12:28 < Ilmen> {lo ka ce'u co'a sanji lo nu ce'u brireisku...}
12:28 < durka42> rlpowell: lol, and the backup was running in the background and slowing stuff down?
12:28 < rlpowell> THe nightly backups should have much less impact now; it's tstill a total outage, but it takes about 2 minutes.
12:28 < durka42> ah
12:28 < rlpowell> durka42: Nope; it requires a table lock.  So.
12:28 < Ilmen> "the relation of [listener] starting to be aware that [speaker] wants them to inform whether...
12:28 < Ilmen> "
12:28 < Ilmen> pei
12:29 < rlpowell> 2 minutes instead of "WTF is going on I give up", whichi s the previous timeframe.
12:29 < durka42> lo du'u lo se cusku cu bilga lo ka jungau lo cusku ...
12:29 < durka42> rlpowell: I am familiar with that unit of time :D
12:29 < rlpowell> :D
12:29 < durka42> it is the basic unit of time used by the Rust compiler
12:29 < rlpowell> LOL.
12:31 < Ilmen> .itlokuti =da'i kai'u ko'a ko'o ko'u ce'ai   da zo'u ko'o cusku ko'u da te zu'e lo nu ko'o da ckini ko'a
12:31 < Ilmen> (simple suggestion)
12:31 < durka42> no place for the da?
12:32 < Ilmen> Cadgu'a don't want an explicit addressee slot
12:32 < Ilmen> so I use da instead
12:32 < durka42> je'e
12:32 < ldlework> Ilmen: I changed my mind on that point
12:32 < ldlework> I think for the same statement different illocutionary forces can be directed at different listeners
12:32 < ldlework> For example, if you state that you will do something in the future, during a speech
12:32 < ldlework> Those who want you to do that thing will hear a promise
12:33 < Ilmen> je'e
12:33 < ldlework> Those who don't want you to do that thing will hear a threat
12:33 < durka42> unless you are a politician
12:33 < durka42> in which case the listeners will hear nothing
12:33 < ldlework> :)
12:33 < zipcpi> {kai'u}?
12:33 < ldlework> is ko'a the x1?
12:33 < Ilmen> At least take note of my lojban definition suggestion, it might be a good starting point
12:34 < durka42> x1=ko'a, x2=ko'o, x3=ko'u
12:34 < ldlework> is the kai'u stuff superflous?
12:34 < durka42> I dunno why the nonstandard choice :)
12:34 < ldlework> in the assumption that stuff is true out of context?
12:34 < zipcpi> Oh it's {me'au lo ka}
12:34 < durka42> kai'u is one way to write definitions
12:34 < durka42> another way is {lo ka ko'a ko'e ko'i itlokuti cu ka ...}
12:34 < durka42> or you can use fabu
12:34 < durka42> or whatever, seems everyone has their own style
12:35 < zipcpi> I prefer du'u if we're gonna fill them in with ko'a-series
12:35 < ldlework> Seems like you could just use the da series direct
12:35 < ldlework> without any abstraction
12:35 < ldlework> and just give the definition
12:35 < Ilmen> I'm the one who first suggested fabu, so ja'odai I have several definition styles :P
12:36 < zipcpi> Do we also need {ka'ei'u}? lol
12:36 < ldlework> oh there are only three da
12:36 < Ilmen> Technically "ce'u" is the way to go for writting x1...xN
12:36 < ldlework> seems like ko'a is a fine choice
12:36 < ldlework> like
12:36 < Ilmen> x1 citka x2 ---->  ce'u citka ce'u
12:36 < ldlework> yeah but that's silly
12:36 < ldlework> oh
12:36 < ldlework> but for definitions you need something that distinguishes
12:37 < Ilmen> But ce'u has disadvantage
12:37 < Ilmen> s
12:37 < latro`a_> so in official jbo you bind ce'u to bindable variables
12:37 < ldlework> like seems like you could just state your definition as the second part
12:37 < durka42> ce'ai is shorthand for zo'u with sequential ce'u bindings
12:37 < zipcpi> ldlework: Erm, *someone* took bo'V exactly for that purpose
12:37 < Ilmen> (the reader has to count the slots etc)
12:37 < latro`a_> and in experimentals you can avoid the explicit bindings with ce'ai
12:37 < durka42> fabu is clearest for me
12:37 < ldlework> zipcpi: nice, seems the cleanest
12:37 < durka42> but apparently a true lojbanist can here "zo'u" and immediately memorize an unbounded list of bindings :p
12:37 < durka42> hear*
12:37 < ldlework> What does the da standfor in ilmen's definition?
12:38 < durka42> ldlework: see the internal {zo'u}
12:38 < durka42> it stands for "someone"
12:38 < Ilmen> ldlework: the addressee
12:38 < ldlework> so x5?
12:38 < ldlework> I realize da was used to side-step positionality
12:38 < Ilmen> well with the aforementioned def there is only three slots
12:38 < ldlework> but would it be x5?
12:38 < durka42> Ilmen wrote a definition that involves an addressee without exposing it in the place structure
12:38 < ldlework> oh right so x4
12:39 < durka42> function itlokuti(x1, x2, x3) { let da = new Addressee(); let bridi = ...; return bridi; }
12:39 < ldlework> Ilmen: can you state your definition plainly with just koha4?
12:39 < ldlework> including the addressee
12:39 < Amnadya> I think {.itlokuti} could have a minimalistic (#zancari) 2-place definition, and a 3-place definition if the speaker matters.
12:40 < zipcpi> Maybe {ka'ei} should be just {ka} + some UI
12:40 < durka42> which 2 places, Amnadya?
12:40 < Amnadya> The utterance, and its purpose.
12:40 < ldlework> Both the speaker and the listener matter though.
12:40 < Amnadya> (in reverse order)
12:40 < ldlework> No utterance has an implicit purpose
12:40 < durka42> hmm
12:40 < Amnadya> You mean "inherent"
12:40 < ldlework> And given a speaker, no utterance has an implicit purpose
12:40 < durka42> the speaker can be an attribute of an utterance though
12:40 < ldlework> sure
12:40 < zipcpi> Then that's just {itlokuti skuselzu'e}
12:41 < durka42> ma itlokuti lo se cusku be do...
12:41 < ldlework> The bigger question is wtf an itlokuti1 is
12:41 < Ilmen> .itlokuti =da'i kai'u bo'e cusku bo'i bo'o te zu'e lo nu bo'e bo'o ckini bo'a
12:41 < durka42> {le'o ma itlokuti lo se cusku be do} would be the nerdy translation of "what did you mean by that, *******?!"
12:41 < Ilmen> @ ldlework
12:41 < durka42> oi
12:41 < ldlework> Ilmen: ki'e
12:41 < Ilmen> with bo'V = xN
12:41 < durka42> ko na pilno lo mabla cmavo pe la zipcpi
12:41 < durka42> .u'i
12:42 < zipcpi> u'i
12:42 < Amnadya> loi mabla cnino !
12:42 < Amnadya> pe le gerna
12:42 < Amnadya> those bloody new inventions
12:42 < durka42> _re_inventions
12:42 < zipcpi> mi remoi kurti
12:42 < Amnadya> (well nick was referring to {bu'u}...)
12:43 < durka42> haha
12:43 < Ilmen> ldlework: In my proposed def, an itlokuti-1 is a relation (binary-ka) that the speaker wants to have with the addressee as a result of uttering the specified utterance
12:44 < ldlework> Ilmen: that seems strange since not all illocutionary forces have to do with binding the speaker and listener in anyway
12:44 < zipcpi> "binding" is very loose here
12:44 < ldlework> Even so
12:44 < ldlework> If those variables are bound, they appear in the abstraction somewhere
12:44 < Ilmen> this could be for example the relation "[addressee] begins to be aware than [speaker] wants them to tell them whether [proposition] is true", etc
12:44 < ldlework> Which might not always make sense
12:44 < zipcpi> All it means is "speaker predicates the listener" in some way
12:44 < ldlework> If anything
12:44 < ldlework> I would say
12:44 < ldlework> It is a set of properties bound to the listener
12:45 < ldlework> IE, the intended perlocutionary effects
12:45 < ldlework> The speaker is irrelevant, unless specifically addressed by those effects.
12:45 < Ilmen> je'e
12:45 < latro`a_> it doesn't have to be plural, you can roll "properties" in the english sense into one block in lojban
12:45 < Ilmen> Then it may be an unary/monadic property of the addressee
12:45 < latro`a_> interesting perspective, though
12:45 < ldlework> We have other words that denote sets though
12:46 < latro`a_> sure, but it's not necessary
12:46 < latro`a_> it can just as well be {lo ka ... gi'e ... gi'e ...}
12:46 < ldlework> Sure but the sets definition allows for actual sets
12:46 < latro`a_> unless there is something like "each one of these is a *possible* effect" or something
12:46 < latro`a_> why do you want a set?
12:46 < ldlework> Including the set of a singular conjunctive property
12:46 < ldlework> latro`a_: its more general?
12:46 < ldlework> more accomodating
12:46 < latro`a_> in what respect is it more general?
12:47 < ldlework> I don't have to tie up all my properties if they exist separately with a conjunction just to fit it into the x1
12:47 < latro`a_> unless you're actually doing something to the elements separately in the predicate, it's just syntactic noise
12:47 < ldlework> If I happen to have a single property, I can just submit it
12:47 < ldlework> What
12:47 < latro`a_> the predicate to which you pass the set, that is
12:47 < ldlework> There's no syntax effects based on the definition of the predicate
12:47 < ldlework> it simplly *allows* for non-singular references
12:47 < ldlework> It still allows for the singular reference
12:47 < Ilmen> if .itlokuti-1 is passed to ckini-2, then giving a property plural as itlokuti-1 probably doesn't pose a problem
12:47 < ldlework> IE the set with one item
12:47 < ldlework> I can't understand how you can't cede that being more general
12:48 < latro`a_> I'm saying, when would the plural form be different from the singular conjunctive form
12:48 < latro`a_> semantically
12:48 < Ilmen> if ckini allows for plural of properties as its x3
12:48 < latro`a_> because the singular conjunctive form involves fewer words
12:48 < latro`a_> in jbo
12:48 < ldlework> latro`a_: never semantically, but in terms of what types we pass to our predicates it matters
12:48 < ldlework> If I *already have* seprarte properties, as the language allows, I don't have to provide a singular conjunction
12:48 < ldlework> As your definition would require
12:48 < latro`a_> ah, so you mean if you have separate properties bound
12:48 < ldlework> The alternative perfectly supports all cases
12:49 < latro`a_> though in practice the situation is still the same, it's just that we already have the set-building combinator but not the property-conjuncting combinator
12:49 < ldlework> I may have a thing, a discrete set, of properties that I want to pass to the predicate
12:49 < ldlework> But with your definition, I have to reach inside, and join them, and pass that
12:49 < latro`a_> unless you have a combinator to conjunct properties
12:49 < ldlework> Right which is extra work
12:49 < latro`a_> which we don't now, but could easily define
12:50 < ldlework> For literally no other difference
12:50 < Ilmen> What tell you my definition prevent plurals of properties from being acceptable as itlokuti-x1?
12:50 < ldlework> Other than requiring one, so that you can pass a singular property
12:50 < ldlework> When you can do that anyway
12:50 < ldlework> when a set is required
12:50 < ldlework> Ilmen: type fetishism
12:50 < Amnadya> What are you even talking about...
12:50 < latro`a_> it adds the syntactic noise of putting it in a singleton set, if you actually want a set rather than the usual "default plural reference" that we use
12:50 < ldlework> latro`a_: true
12:51 < ldlework> damn that's even more extremist than I was imagining
12:51 < ldlework> okay lets go back to ignoring the problem
12:51 < Ilmen> I don't even see what's the problem
12:51 < ldlework> Ilmen: nevermind its not important
12:52 < ldlework> I fell into an argument I tend to think is stupid anyway :3
12:52 < ldlework> or rather started it
12:52 < Ilmen> I don't think {mi ckaji lo ka sipna jo'u lo ka senva} is bad
12:52 < ldlework> that itlokuti-1 is properties of the listener is pretty nice lojbanic way of describing illocutionary force
12:53 < Ilmen> (giving a plural of ka's to ckaji2)
12:53 < durka42> and here I thought illocution was about the speaker
12:53 < ldlework> durka42: its the effects in the listener, that the speaker intends to bring about
12:53 < ldlework> communication is all about getting the listener to know what we what them to know
12:54 < durka42> ah I see
12:54 < ldlework> the definition of peritlokuti should be just a small mutation to the definition of itlokuti
12:54 < ldlework> Here's a question
12:54 < Ilmen> x2 cusku x3 fo x4 te zu'e lo nu x4 ckaji x1
12:55 < Amnadya> tosmabru alert
12:55 < ldlework> Is a perlocutionary force dependent on the speaker who uttered it?
12:55 < ldlework> I think so.
12:56 < Ilmen> {perlokuti} @Amnadya
12:56 < Amnadya> ie
12:56 < Ilmen> naljudyselsre
12:56 < ldlework> Sorry, I don't have the morphology within me :(
12:57 < Amnadya> lo do ve skicu cu simlu lo ka na mabla doi la .ilmen.
12:57 < Ilmen> The word shapes aren't very relevant of the discussion anyway
12:57 < Ilmen> so ju'inai jbopli
12:57 < Amnadya> mi'e jboplise
12:59 < Ilmen> Whoops, meant to say {cusku x3 fi x4...}
12:59 < Amnadya> .i ka'e plixau fa lo nu da'i x4 ba'e ckini x2 fi x1
12:59 < Ilmen> mabla se ju jai se bebysre
13:00 < Amnadya> .i ku'i lo te ckini sumti ka'e jai fanza
13:00 < ldlework> en: preti
13:00 < mensi> preti = x1 (quoted text) is a question/query about subject x2 by questioner x3 to audience x4. |>>> See also nabmi,
13:00 < mensi> danfu, ciksi, frati, spuda, cpedu. |>>> officialdata
13:00 < Ilmen> .i mi pu stidi tau me'ei ckini .i ku'i la cadgu'a cu jinvi lodu ka'e xlali fe mu'a tau zo ca'e
13:01 < Amnadya> mi ji'a pu pensi zo ca'e
13:01 < ldlework> Thanks for the discussion
13:01 < Amnadya> .i ku'i ie pei zo ca'e zo'u lo nu cusku zo ca'e fau lo nu no da tirna ja sanji cu se jalge na ku lo te zukte
13:01 < mensi> mi tugni i ie mi tugni
13:01 < Amnadya> .i sarcu fa lo nu su da tirna je cu .y tugni
13:01 < Amnadya> ja cu se mansa
13:12 < Ilmen> Are you satisfied with the definition of {.itlokuti} we've come up with so far? If so, we probably should add it to JVS, even if it'll be adjusted/corrected later, so that the fruits of this discussions don't get lost.
13:12 < durka42> ko na cirko lo grute be lo dei nuncasnu
13:15 < zipcpi> u'i
13:17 < Ilmen> Well then I'll add it; feel free to later edit it, mangle its argument structure or propose competing definitions if a vote is desirable.
13:17 < zipcpi> Ilmen: I'm not sure he's here anymore... just add it
13:19 < Ilmen> mi vi'onde
13:19 < durka42> what time is it in california anyway
13:19 < durka42> la'a lunchtime
13:19 < Ilmen> .y za'a do xa'o finti lo velski prosa pe zo .itloku'i
13:19 < Ilmen> .i ku'i smuni frica
13:20 < Ilmen> .i .au pei dunda lo dei smuni lo drata brivo
13:20 < durka42> .ai mi tavla fo lo .itlo ku'i
13:21 < Ilmen> lo .itlokuti cu .itlo kunti
13:21 < Ilmen> li'a dai
13:21 < durka42> oi'o
13:23 < Amnadya> .itlo kurti
13:23 < Ilmen> ju'i la zipcpi
13:23 < Ilmen> .u'i
13:23 < zipcpi> coi
13:24 < zipcpi> Ilmen: No, go ahead and overwrite my definition
13:24 < Ilmen> .i ke'u .i zo .itlokuti zo'u do ba'o smudu'a .i .au pei lo cnino smuni zo'u smudu'a lo drata poi brivo
13:24 < zipcpi> Or just add yours
13:24 < Ilmen> .i je'e
13:24 < zipcpi> I downvoted myself
13:25 < zipcpi> Cause I defined them with the LOJBO frame just so I can use them in tanru
13:25 < Ilmen> .i ku'i lo nu dizlo cmicu'a cu banzu lo nu na ka'e galtu cmicu'a lo cnino zo'o
13:25 < Ilmen> sei zangli si malgli
13:25 < zipcpi> lol
13:26 < zipcpi> ma'udzau, ni'udzau. Or use gleki's word {dudvota} but I don't like having to specify dudvota2, or use a sumtcita for the system
13:27 < durka42> I like ma'udzau and ni'udzau, they're more lojbanic
13:27 < durka42> being jbofuvi
13:27 < zipcpi> Heh
13:28 < Ilmen> $x_1$ (property of $x_4) is the illocution of $x_2$ uttering/expressing $x_3$ (quote) to audience $x_4$; $x_2$ utters/expresses $x_3$ to $x_4$ in order that $x_4$ has property $x_1$
13:28 < Ilmen> .i'e pe
13:28 < Ilmen> i
13:28 < zipcpi> i'e
13:30 < Amnadya> Speaking of illocution, in Ithkuil illocution can be shown in an affix together with mood. There are 8 moods and 6 illocutions, so there are 48 affix forms for this slot. Some of the combinations are rather odd, so I'm making a table
13:31 < Amnadya> (well actually 41)
13:32 < Ilmen> mo'u smudu'a
13:32 < Ilmen> .i jmina lo lojbo ku ji'a
13:32 < Ilmen> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/itlokuti
13:34 < Ilmen> Maybe an illocution isn't specific only to linguistic utterances. How about handwaves and other syntaxless gestures?
13:34 < zipcpi> Hm that's related to the problem of what cusku2 should be o.o
13:36 < Ilmen> jbo: vi'o
13:36 < mensi> vi'o = [COI] tcita lo cmene ja ve skicu le du'u sinxa le du'u makau te cusku .e le du'u le cusku ba cpezu'e fi le te
13:36 < mensi> cusku |>>> doi; cpezu'e |>>> xorxes
13:36 < Amnadya> (off-topic/ithkuil: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NmTjSi51M8LCvjEJUWro03tS5AdPJNDLCeyWDOmTWMo/edit#gid=0 )
13:37 < Ilmen> mi benji lo curmi cpedu notci
13:37 < Ilmen> do doi la .amdadiĭas.
13:37 < zipcpi> Problem is then defining {lotkuti} and {perlokuti} :p
13:38 < Ilmen> pe'i pei lotkuti ≠ cusku
13:38 < Amnadya> ua nai doi la .ilmen.
13:38 < zipcpi> "pertaining to the act of conveying semantic content in an utterance, considered as independent of the interaction between the speaker and the listener."
13:38 < Ilmen> "You need permission"
13:38 < zipcpi> Hmm...
13:39 < Ilmen> lo sfaile cu se stela doi la .amnadıǐas.
13:39 < Amnadya> .u'u https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NmTjSi51M8LCvjEJUWro03tS5AdPJNDLCeyWDOmTWMo/edit?usp=sharing
13:40 < zipcpi> Amnadya: Hm related is the problem that Gleki and I are currently in a "fight" over what {ju'anai} should mean
13:40 < zipcpi> Problem is I don't understand what he wants it for
13:41 < zipcpi> He mentioned something related to Ithkuil
13:41 < Amnadya> I think he uses it for representative essence
13:41 < Amnadya> Instead of da'i
13:42 < zipcpi> The problem is that {ju'a} is defined as related to {xusra}. .iku'i gy xusra lo drata :p
13:42 < Amnadya> I need a unique example in each cell, because I want to translate them into Ithkuil and memorize the 41 combinations that way.
13:42 < zipcpi> I can't help you there T.T
13:44 < zipcpi> Admonitive/subjunctive: "This may hurt"?
13:45 < Amnadya> The admonitives are easy to combine for me, because it's just an added warning.
13:45 < Amnadya> But combining ko with ju'ocu'i is weird
13:46 < zipcpi> Heh
13:46 < Amnadya> "Make it the case that you might go there"
13:46 < zipcpi> Declarative = {ca'e}?
13:46 < Amnadya> Yes
13:46 < Ilmen> What is no'e birti, again? Mild certitude?
13:47 < Ilmen> Is Declarative synonymous to Performative in Iþkuîl?
13:47 < Amnadya> Yes
13:47 < Ilmen> je'e
13:48 < Ilmen> (To me, þ is easier to type than t-cedilla)
13:48 < zipcpi> ca'e lo redo co'a speni zu'ai
13:48 < Ilmen> spesi'u
13:48 < Ilmen> .e'u
13:48 < Ilmen> je'au zo
13:48 < zipcpi> I tend to avoid most RDA
13:49 < Ilmen> ki'a
13:49 < zipcpi> Regular derivational affixes
13:49 < zipcpi> I'm saving them for when relyle'ujvo is finished
13:49 < zipcpi> -gau is really hard to avoid though I'd admit
13:49 < Ilmen> gau X broda
13:50 < Ilmen> simxu could be remade as a SE
13:50 < zipcpi> Yes, I use that. But sometimes that is inconvenient
13:50 < zipcpi> Oh, gleki did make it a SE, but he abandoned it in favor of zu'ai
13:50 < Ilmen> selmaho: zu'ai
13:50 < mensi> .i lu zu'ai li'u cmavo zo'oi KOhA7
13:50 < mensi> http://lojban.github.io/cll/7/7/
13:50 < Ilmen> wanaɪ
13:51 < Ilmen> ithkuil: iþkuîl
13:51 < ithkuil> error
13:52 < zipcpi> Mostly I avoid RDA because they have potentially mabla interactions, and also making sure all lujvo we want to make follow that rule is hard
13:52 < zipcpi> I mean
13:52 < zipcpi> Look at {rebdesygau}
13:52 < Ilmen> Some allographes or alternative letters should be added :3
13:53 < zipcpi> Is it rebdesku + gasnu or rebla + deskygau?
13:53 < zipcpi> And there's also an elided sefsi
13:54 < zipcpi> That's why I like the relyle'ujvo idea. We bring in affixes that are guaranteed to only expand one way
13:54 < zipcpi> Thus allowing regular lujvo to be defined however is convenient
13:56 < Ilmen> en: tolkufygla
13:56 < mensi> [< to'e kufra glare ≈ Polar opposite comfort hot] lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se
13:56 < mensi> tolcri
13:56 < mensi> tolkufygla[9927], tolkufrygla[10957], to'erkufygla[11516], tolkufyglare[11966], to'erkufrygla[12546], ...
13:57 < Ilmen> .i'e finti .i benri si plixau valsi
13:58 < zipcpi> Hmm might want {lenku} variants too
14:00 < Ilmen> en: olgoixorxoi
14:00 < mensi> olgoixorxoi = x1 is an olgoi-khorkhoi/Mongolian death worm of type/variety x2 |>>>
14:00 < mensi> krtisfranks
14:00 < Ilmen> xD
14:00 < zipcpi> lol
14:00 < sorpaas> lujvo: pensi gunma
14:00 < mensi> peirgunma[9006], pesygunma[9037], pensygunma[10067]
14:03 < sorpaas> xu pamai lo lujvo cu drani?
14:03 < zipcpi> What do you want it for?
14:03 < sorpaas> A collection of thoughts?
14:04 < zipcpi> I'd tend to just have {loi selpei} for that...
14:04 < sorpaas> What if I want a selbri...
14:05 < Ilmen> {selpei gunma}, {gunma (be) lo selpei}
14:06 < sorpaas> lujvo: selpei gunma
14:06 < mensi> gunma = x1 is a mass/team/aggregate/whole, together composed of components x2, considered jointly.
14:06 < sorpaas> lujvo: se pensi gunma
14:06 < mensi> selpeigunma[10855], selpesygunma[11986], selpensygunma[13016]
14:07 < zipcpi> Why do you need a lujvo for that? {gunma} isn't an RDA
14:07 < sorpaas> What is an RDA?
14:07 < zipcpi> Regular derivational affix
14:07 < Ilmen> .e'e na pilno lo ki'a zei valsi
14:07 < zipcpi> u'i
14:07 < Ilmen> First say "Regular derivational affix goi RDA" :3
14:08 < zipcpi> :p
14:08 < sorpaas> Can you illustrate that or point me to some links?
14:08 < zipcpi> Erm, we mean things like -gau
14:08 < zipcpi> Which *tend to* (but not always) expand one way when used in lujvo
14:09 < sorpaas> But I found {gungunma} exists in dict.
14:09 < sorpaas> Because I want {la selpeigunma}
14:09 < zipcpi> Hey go ahead and use anything with {la} without defining the brivla
14:09 < Ilmen> He means that you'd need to define {selpeigunma} in the dictionary, because it's not made of semantically compositional elements
14:10 < Ilmen> (rafsi are only there as mnemonic hints, and any lujvo should ideally be defined in the dictionary)
14:10 < sorpaas> Sorry to ask again... what's semantically compositional elements?
14:11 < Ilmen> The meaning of "barda zdani" can be infered from that of "barda" and that of "zdani", so "barda zdani" is compositional
14:12 < zipcpi> I use nonce-lujvo with {la} all the time: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/brivycme but that's different from using it as a real word with an implied place-structure
14:12 < Ilmen> However, the meaning of ".i bu" cannot be inferred from that of ".i" and that of "bu", so it's not compositional and must be learnt in the dictionary or while learning the language
14:13 < sorpaas> @Ilmen but "selpei gunma" makes perfect sense for me: a collection of thoughts?
14:13 < Ilmen> "selpei gunma" as a tanru is fine
14:13 < sorpaas> So basically I just want a name without any whitespace so that I can put it in an url and use it as a Lojbanic name...
14:14 < Ilmen> If you go for a lujvo, however, it would be preferable to define the lujvo in the dictionary
14:14 < Ilmen> Ah
14:14 < zipcpi> Names are fine
14:14 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/brivycme
14:14 < Ilmen> As a name "selpeigunma" is fine
14:14 < Ilmen> la selpeigunma
14:15 < zipcpi> Many of the words on that page don't have a defined meaning otherwise
14:15 < zipcpi> Like {la xorlo} even
14:16 < zipcpi> The main problem even with "obvious" lujvo as a brivla, is the place structure
14:17 < zipcpi> Like what should {lo se selpeigunma} be. If you just use it as a name though, it isn't a problem
14:18 < sorpaas> So the reason why we can't (yet) use selpeigunma as a selbri is that this lujvo is not defined, and If (in imaginary case) I do want that, I need to claim to have defined it first?
14:20 < Ilmen> Well people will not be able to find {selpeigunma} in the dictionary and will have to guess its meaning
14:20 < Ilmen> (a lujvo isn't equal in meaning to a tanru, indeed)
14:21 < sorpaas> Understood. Thanks for all the explanations!
14:21 < Ilmen> je'e ŭi
14:27 < Ilmen> mi de'a jundi co'o
14:27 < zipcpi> co'o
14:34 < sorpaas> lujvo: se gunka
14:34 < mensi> selgu'a[6387], selgunka[7937]
14:34 < mensi> selgu'a [< se gunka ≈ 2nd conversion work] = x1 is a task/work done by x2 with goal/objective  x3.
14:36 < zipcpi> {se gunka} tends to be preferred these days.... less rafsi to memorize or look up :p
14:37 < zipcpi> I gotta go though. Night
14:38 < sorpaas> @zipcpi Thanks! I'm just creating another name :)
14:38 < zipcpi> ua je'e
14:38 < sorpaas> co'o
14:39 < zipcpi> Amnadya: Subjunctive/directive might be "You may want to do this"?
14:39 < zipcpi> Something like e'uru'e ko...
14:40 < zipcpi> Or gajanai da'i do ... gi ko ...
14:40 < Amnadya> I believe illocution has scope over of mood (although the grammar doesn't say .oi sai), and the subjunctive expresses that the factuality of the statement is uncertain.
14:41 < zipcpi> What would be really funny is if you use {cau'a}
14:41 < zipcpi> ko cau'a plipe
14:41 < Amnadya> It's either "Make it the case that X may be the case" or "It may be the case that I direct you to do X". I believe it's the former.
14:42 < Amnadya> The second one doesn't really make sense
14:42 < zipcpi> {ko ka'e plipe}?
14:43 < Amnadya> Soooort of
14:43 < zipcpi> lol
14:43 < zipcpi> OK gotta go
14:43 < zipcpi> co'o
14:43 < Amnadya> co'o :)
15:02 < Sonjaaa> coi!
15:02 < Amnadya> coi
15:04  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: i carmi sicpi    i cerni ruble gusni    i a'o viska    #xaiku #lojban [http://bit.ly/1TOINEO]
15:12 < ctefaho> лах лах и скән жаг сер
15:12 < ctefaho> упп ошһ нер ошһ нер ошһ упп
16:56  * nuzba @slaimsan: How do I say "お大事に" in Lojban? [http://bit.ly/1Idr6GH]
17:26  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: i cerni gusni    i aunaisai balcu'e    i sipna pacna        #xaiku #lojban [http://bit.ly/1COIxRW]
17:44 < sorpaas> lujvo: logji gunka
17:44 < mensi> lojgu'a[6387], lojgunka[7937], logjygu'a[8517], logjygunka[10067]
20:08 < zipcpi> mensi: doi durka42 Don't like bo'V space being taken? Well, if we implemented the {leu} suggestion then FAbu would be just as good as KOhA, then just ca'e ka'ei / ka'ei'u uses that set. But...
20:08 < mensi> zipcpi: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.durka42.gy. di'a cusku da
23:19 < gleki> in la bangu interjections are now split into interjections, suffixes, ending and right scalers
23:19 < gleki> *endings
23:20 < zipcpi> Cool
23:20 < zipcpi> Gotta go. See ya
23:26 < gleki>  If the meaning is preserved, then {na} cannot be a variation of {fi'o se natfe} or {xoi se natfe}, as that would make {ro da} an argument of {na} and remove it from the x1 place of {zvati}, which is not what's happening here.</quote>
23:26 < gleki> wat
23:26 < gleki> this means NA is still a new selmaho
23:27 < gleki> obviously im not going to add one more member into FAM,BAM, ZAM set
--- Day changed Wed Jul 22 2015
00:35 < isd> coi rodo .i do mo
00:38 < gleki> irci
00:40 < durka42> sampla
00:40 < mensi> durka42: cu'u la'o gy.zipcpi.gy.: Don't like bo'V space being taken? Well, if we implemented the {leu} suggestion then
00:40 < mensi> FAbu would be just as good as KOhA, then just ca'e ka'ei / ka'ei'u uses that set. But... | 2015-07-22T03:08:29.
00:40 < mensi> 325Z
00:40 < isd> .u'i
00:41 < durka42> jeez
00:41 < durka42> {boi} is just one syllable
00:41 < gleki> alta: li ny pa ny mo
00:41 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹[VEI {ny <pa ny>} VEhO] BOI¹) LOhO>} {CU <mo VAU>}])
00:42 < gleki> alta: li ny pa ny re ny re ny mo
00:42 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li (¹[VEI {ny <pa ny> <re ny> <re ny>} VEhO] BOI¹) LOhO>} {CU <mo VAU>}])
00:42 < gleki> no idea how it should look like
00:43 < gleki> restore VEI in front of each letteral?
00:43 < durka42> do troci ma
00:44 < gleki> lo nu lo prane meksyci'e co'a zasti
00:44 < gleki> btw implement this for Lojban http://www.cs.ru.nl/~freek/pubs/holcas.pdf
00:46 < durka42> .u'i
00:58 < gleki> exp: lo broda noi mo
00:58 < mensi> ([lo {broda <noi (¹CU [mo VAU]¹) KUhO>} KU] VAU)
00:58 < gleki> the same as {lo broda ku noi mo}, right?
00:58 < gleki> semantically i mean
01:02 < durka42> camxes: lo broda noi mo
01:02 < camxes> ([lo {broda <noi (¹mo VAU¹) KUhO>} KU] VAU)
01:02 < durka42> camxes: lo broda ku noi mo
01:02 < camxes> ([{lo broda ku} {noi <mo VAU> KUhO}] VAU)
01:03 < durka42> yeah probably the same since {noi} can't affect the set of referents
01:05 < gleki> im completely lost. then why is it parsed so?
01:05 < gleki> why not put {ku} before {noi}?
01:08 < gleki> PEG says literally "selbri relative_clauses?" wth. are we having a bridi relative clause here? ;D
01:10 < durka42> quantifiers
01:13 < gleki> http://lojban.github.io/cll/8/6/
01:13 < gleki> 6.5 = 6.7
01:17 < durka42> iep
01:17 < gleki> but that's when quantifiers exist
01:18 < gleki> because the next two rules make sense 
01:18 < gleki> quantifier selbri relative_clauses? / quantifier sumti
01:19 < gleki> if one considers "quantifier selbri" as one construct
01:19 < durka42> without quantifiers it still matters with {poi}
01:19 < durka42> as selpa'i was talking about yesterday
01:19 < durka42> restrictive/unrestrictive
01:20 < durka42> so you can't just put the {ku} inside every time there is no quantifier
01:21 < gleki> what is the difference and where?
01:22 < gleki> 6.1=6.2=6.3
01:22 < durka42> that's where there is a difference
01:23 < gleki> difference from CLL?
01:23 < durka42> a xorlo difference I guess
01:23 < durka42> it's still fuzzy for me
01:23 < durka42> though selpa'i claims I understand it
01:23 < durka42> you'll have to scroll up
01:25 < durka42> actually selpa'i would claim that {lo broda ku poi brode} is useless I think
01:25 < durka42> because {lo broda ku} identifies the referents already
01:28 < gleki> i just dont like that relative clause attaches to selbri directly
01:28 < gleki> sumti_5, sumti_tail and sumti_tail_1 is a complete mess
02:07 < gleki> what is useless, what is not useless
02:07 < gleki> ...
02:12 < gleki> how are those examples expanded using {me} or whatever ...
02:59 < phma> lo ckunu na ckini lo ckana
03:38 < Amnadya> coi
03:38 < gleki> coi prije
03:39 < Amnadya> .i mi co'a lo prula'i vanci cu bilma fi lo crisa .influ'enza
03:39 < gleki> oi dai
03:39 < gleki> i e'uru'e do vreta gi'enai pilno lo skami
03:40 < Amnadya> mi ba'o ze'u vreta .i nitcu lo ka na vreta
03:42 < Amnadya> .i ui nai la durka ba'o cliva
03:42 < gleki> lo nu pilno lo skami a lo jbobau ka'e milxe ckape lo bilma
03:43 < Amnadya> xu go'i
03:43 < gleki> lo do stedu ka'e spoja vau zo'o
03:43 < Amnadya> pe'i spoja ri'a lo nu lo nazbi cu culno
03:44 < gleki> i e'u do na pilno lo skami ije fau lo nu do djica co jbozu'e vau finti lo lojbo sepi'o ke po'o lo stedu
03:45 < Amnadya> .u'i zo'o mi ji do prije .i do stidi lo jai se prije
03:46 < Amnadya> .i je'e je'e .i ku'i .ai cusku pa da
03:46 < Amnadya> .i va'o lo nu da'i sai do na se vajni lo nu spofygau lo purci jboselsku zo'u zo poi poi jbini lo selbri joi zo ku ka'e se vimcu lo bangu
03:49 < Amnadya> (to cumki ju xamgu toi)
03:50 < gleki> sa'u mi nitcu lo ve ciksi be ci jufra
03:51 < gleki> i re lo poi ninmu vau mu prenu cu broda
03:51 < gleki> i re lo mu prenu poi ninmu cu broda
03:51 < gleki> i re lo mu prenu ku poi ninmu cu broda
03:51  * Amnadya cu bilma je na se .e'ande fi lo ka pensi lo pluja
03:51 < gleki> i oi za'u ci jufra
03:51 < gleki> Amnadya: ie zo'onai e'u do zei'a kanro i ta'i bo na pensi
03:52 < gleki> i ai mi co'u retsku
03:52 < Amnadya> je'e .i .ai mi ba zi cliva .i ku'i ro mai do ma djica .i xu djica tau lo jufra poi na se pagbu zo poi
03:53 < Amnadya> .i va'i ma tarmi lo zo poi ve ciksi je cu jai se djica do
03:53 < gleki> mi djica tu'a lo xe fanva be le ci jufra
03:54 < gleki> to ta'o caku mi spofygau lo PEG gerna toi
03:54 < Amnadya> xu mi zifre lo ka fanva .i glico
03:55 < gleki> zifre
03:55 < gleki> i mi pu'i tcidu CLL
03:56 < Amnadya> je'e .i mi ba sidju do za ku .ai
03:56 < Amnadya> mensi: doi durka42 {lo broda ku poi brode} is not useless, but simply distinct from {lo broda poi brode}. The former has the same form as e.g. {do poi brode}, which isn't useless at all (it implies a non-singular {do}, and the referent(s) of {do poi brode} is/are merely among the referents of {do}, but usually not the same.)
03:56 < mensi> Amnadya: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.durka42.gy. di'a cusku da
03:56 < Amnadya> co'o ru'e
03:57 < gleki> co'o
05:01 < gleki> this non ASCII symbols JVS bug is terrible
05:37 < gleki> wow, Curtis wrote a new page to the wiki!
06:54 < gleki> aha now i see why guskant wanted {nu tu'u mi mo ije do mo tu'u kei}
07:46  * nuzba @uitki: Proposal: distinguishing digits from numbers #lojban http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Proposal:_distinguishing_digits_from_numbers [http://bit.ly/1HRC3OH]
07:46  * nuzba @uitki: fancy #lojban challenges http://mw.lojban.org/papri/fancylojban_challenges [http://bit.ly/1MokJr6]
07:46  * nuzba @uitki: The North Wind and the Sun in #lojban The North Wind and the Sun [http://bit.ly/1MokJY8]
07:46  * nuzba @lojban_org: The North Wind and the Sun in #lojban The North Wind and the Sun [http://bit.ly/1HRCecP]
07:46  * nuzba @uitki: Eulojban #lojban http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Eulojban [http://bit.ly/1MokKuZ]
07:50  * nuzba @uitki: Sour Grapes story in #lojban http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Sour_Grapes [http://bit.ly/1MokNa5]
08:14  * la_kristan may be suddenly disconnected at any moment.
08:14 < la_kristan> .i coi
08:15 < la_kristan> .i xu lo prenu cu zvati
08:15 <@xalbo> mi zvati
08:15 <@xalbo> .i ca ku mi jundi
08:15 < clakre> coi la kristan!
08:16 < la_kristan> :-)
08:17 < la_kristan> the end bracket on my name makes the smiley face look like a mean face at first glance...
08:17 < sorpaas> Is whitespace necessary in Lojban?
08:17 < la_kristan> sometimes
08:18 < la_kristan> it helps one see where the stresses syllables are.
08:18 < la_kristan> *stressed
08:19 < la_kristan> .i zoi gy. futile .gy. xe fanva ma la .lojban.
08:23 < la_kristan> .i xu do djuno
08:25 < la_kristan> .i do djuno .i ku'i do na djica lonu do cusku fi mi
08:26 < la_kristan> .i uinai
08:27 < la_kristan> .i doi @xalbo do na jundi .i la'a la clakre na djuno
08:28 <@xalbo> .u'u mi pu de'a jundi
08:28 < clakre> mi na djuno ma?
08:28 < clakre> (answer: almost everything)
08:28 < la_kristan> .u'i
08:29 <@xalbo> zoi gy. futile .gy srana zo fliba .e zo troci .e zo plixau to dukti toi .i ku'i mi sanji lo prane panra
08:29 < la_kristan> .i doi clakre do na djuno ledu'u zoi gy. futile .gy. xe fanva ma kau la .lojban.
08:30 < Thorne> Is it possible to make a Double entendre in Lojban?
08:30 < clakre> ua
08:31 < ldlework> A double-entendre is helped by polysemy but doesn't require it
08:31 < zipcpi> be'e mensi
08:31 < zipcpi> What have I done... I just invented pointers lol
08:32  * la_kristan looks up each word of @xalbo 's response...
08:32 <@xalbo> Now I need to figure out how to use mekso together with {la'e} and {lu'e} to do pointer arithmetic in Lojban.
08:33 < zipcpi> Heh... I don't use mekso
08:33 <@xalbo> .i'e
08:33 < Thorne> Would you say Lojban would be an ideal first language in a future society?
08:34 <@xalbo> I think it would definitely be an interesting one, in the scifi sense. In the world we live in, I don't see it ever actually happening.
08:34 < zipcpi> I use {le sumji be li pa bei li pa cu du li re} instead
08:34 <@xalbo> I use {li re sumji li pa li pa}.
08:34 < Thorne> But  ambiguity is not always disadvantageous, I suppose.
08:35 < zipcpi> Or that could work too
08:35 < Thorne> Especially to literature.
08:35 < zipcpi> I was thinking too hard
08:35 < ldlework> Thorne: Lojban is only grammatically unambiguous
08:35 < ldlework> Thorne: it has plenty of the semantic kind
08:35 < zipcpi> {sumji li pa li pa fa li re} works too
08:35 < sorpaas> How to say "at a time" in the sense of "step by step" or "not worrying about the future" like in "finish a bit work a day at a time"?
08:35 <@xalbo> jbopre tend to use the words "ambiguous" and "vague" in particular ways, so that we can claim that Lojban is never ambiguous, but it is possibly vague, sometimes far more so than natlangs.
08:35 < Thorne> Yeah, I speak of grammatically ambiguity..
08:36 < Thorne> I think it would make an ideal second language for  certain needs.
08:37 < Thorne> Hehe, My scrollback says [20:54] * Loaded log from Fri May 17 23:58:19 2013.
08:37 < Thorne> Last time I came here to discuss my presentation.
08:38 < la_kristan> futility of futility; all is futile!
08:38 < zipcpi> Anyway with a few magic brivla for variables and while-loops I came up with this: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/zipcpi:_solution-gcd-2
08:39 < la_kristan> leave it to zipcpi to have magic brivla...
08:39 < Thorne> I should google for some puns in Lojban.
08:40 < zipcpi> la_kristan: Psht. I don't hold a candle to Ilmen for inventing magic brivla :p
08:40 <@xalbo> sorpaas: I'm not thinking of a good direct equivalent. I can think of ways to paraphrase it, like {ko ca gunka lo cabna .e nai lo balvi}.
08:41 < Thorne> BBS.
08:41 <@xalbo> And krtisfranks for magic cmavo.
08:41 < zipcpi> Haha
08:41 < la_kristan> @xalbo so, like "vain"; "all is vanity"
08:42 < ldlework> xalbo: I was thinking more of a preposition of some kind
08:42 < la_kristan> My translating of Ecclesiastes can't progress very well without it.
08:42 < zipcpi> I dunno, they have pretty good lojban defs imo. Except maybe for goilka'i... not sure what {virtu'ale} means formally :p
08:42 < zipcpi> Oh... you should talk to phma
08:42 < zipcpi> He's working on translating the Bible too
08:43 < zipcpi> la_kristan: The word {kosmu} might be helpful there
08:43 < phma> You called?
08:43 <@xalbo> Seems like {narplixau} or something.
08:44 < la_kristan> I got pretty far in translating John 1 into toki pona...
08:44 < sorpaas> @xalbo thanks! I found the definition of "at a time" in dictionary is "during any one period". Is {ca lo paroi} a valid translation for that?
08:44 < sorpaas> Or {ca'o lo paroi}?
08:44 < la_kristan> phma : they say you're translating the Bible too.
08:45 < la_kristan> I was trying to say "vanity of vanities; all is vanity."
08:45 < la_kristan> but not succeeding.
08:46 < phma> Someone's done Ecclesiastes 1. Let me see if I can figure out who it was in the git log.
08:46 < sorpaas> Oh, should it be {ca'o pa loi paroi}?
08:47 < la_kristan> zipcpi : "no such valsi in the dictionary "
08:47 <@xalbo> sorpaas: Those don't parse. {paroi} is a tense.
08:47 <@xalbo> {ca [ro] lo [pa] krefu} might be about right.
08:47 < ldlework> ko jundi pa da ba tu'a le bavla'i
08:47 < phma> It's la mukti, aka Shunpiker.
08:48 <@xalbo> sorpaas: ldlework's suggestion is nice.
08:48 < la_kristan> phma : link?
08:48 < ldlework> ki'e
08:49 < phma> https://github.com/phma/lojban-bible/
08:50 < ldlework> hmm, I wish I could suggest to them to use diacritics(??) instead of captilization
08:50 < zipcpi> danmo... hm that's pretty metaphoric
08:50 < phma> Are you going to jbonunsla?
08:50 < ldlework> doi ma
08:51 < phma> la kristan
08:51 < ldlework> ba'a la kristan
08:51 < ldlework> jinga
08:51 < zipcpi> Reminds me of a Chinese idiom. Literally meaning something like {fomsle draci}
08:51 < ldlework> heh
08:52 < la_kristan> phma : no, I won't make it.
08:53 < zipcpi> ldlework: Yeah a lot of what is there is somewhat dated in style. Stuff like .xaviLOT. was obviously made pre-dotside too
08:53 < zipcpi> (Havilah)
08:54 < sorpaas> Thanks! I spent sometime understanding that and it sounds pretty!
08:55 < la_kristan> .i doi la'o gy. Idlework .gy. xu do djica lonu do cusku zo be'e .enai zo ba'a
08:57 < la_kristan> "everything is smoke/smog/air pollution"...
08:57 < la_kristan> fascinating
08:59 < zipcpi> {jajgau} for teacher though? Not sure about that?
09:00 <@xalbo> zipcpi: IIRC, there was a user who went by Imami, who said that the literal translation was something based jmaji.
09:00  * la_kristan could still be suddenly disconnected at any time
09:00 < zipcpi> Oh... the source text
09:00 < zipcpi> I don't know Hebrew or Classical Greek
09:01 < zipcpi> Makes me wonder about the {danmo} metaphor
09:01 < la_kristan> me neither.
09:02 < la_kristan> I usually rely on the Esperanto translation.
09:02 < zipcpi> I tend to use the Amplified Bible when trying to translate to Lojban
09:03 < zipcpi> And hm, it uses "vapor". Interesting
09:03 < la_kristan> http://www.steloj.de/esperanto/biblio/libro_pre.html
09:04 < zipcpi> I don't know Esperanto though
09:04 < la_kristan> vantaĵo
09:04 < la_kristan> not any more helpful than the kjv
09:05 < zipcpi> Amplified Bible: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes+1&version=AMP
09:05 < ldlework> la_kristan: no I was saying "I expect you, doi la kristan"
09:06 < sorpaas> And how to say "I'm only one [person]"? Can "one" itself be a selbri?
09:06 < ldlework> sa'u mi du pa prenu
09:06 < zipcpi> mi pa po'o mei
09:06 < la_kristan> afk
09:06 < sorpaas> Yeah, thanks!
09:07 < zipcpi> {mei} turns a number into a selbri, meaning "numbering this many"
09:07 < ldlework> It seems wierd to use po'o with a number, but sure
09:07 < zipcpi> {po'o} means "only", attaches to last lexical unit, in this case {pa}
09:08 < gleki> i'd rely on glossed version in original languages than on any translations
09:08 < ldlework> sorpaas: do gunka ma
09:10 < sorpaas> mi troci co finti lo zgike
09:11 < sorpaas> se se se fanva lo zgike
09:11 < ldlework> ua je'e
09:11 < ldlework> a'o snada
09:11 < la_kristan> se se se?
09:11 < sorpaas> What's the word for earsing the last word?
09:11 < ldlework> si
09:11 < la_kristan> si
09:11 < la_kristan> all together now...
09:12 < la_kristan> Idlework : no point in expecting me...
09:13 < la_kristan> I have prior reservations
09:13 < la_kristan> in the opposite direction.
09:14 < la_kristan> I'm going to Oregon; wish I could stay there forever.
09:15 < la_kristan> except to go to jbonunsla
09:15 < gleki> if {po'o} is like DA not only in scope but in existentiality then who knows
09:16 < la_kristan> gleki : to what are you referring?
09:16 < sorpaas> lujvo: galtu traji
09:16 < gleki> 09:06 < zipcpi> mi pa po'o mei
09:18 < mensi> galrai[5867], ga'unrai[7456], galtraji[7917], galtyrai[7997], ga'urtraji[9506], ...
09:18 < gleki> {serai galtu} might also work
09:19 < cliva> exp: mo gi'e ba ke mo
09:19 < mensi> ([CU {mo VAU}] [gi'e ba] ke [CU {mo VAU}] KEhE VAU)
09:19 < cliva> exp: mo gi'e cu ba ke mo
09:19 < mensi> ([CU {mo VAU}] [gi'e {cu <ba (¹ke mo KEhE¹)> VAU} VAU])
09:19 < cliva> gerna: mo gi'e ba ke mo
09:19 < mensi> (0[{mo VAU} {gi'e ba} ke {mo VAU} VAU])0
09:20 < cliva> gerna: mo gi'e cu ba ke mo
09:20 < mensi> O_0
09:20 < gleki> zo cu sepli cmavo
09:20 < zipcpi> Another possibility might be {mi za'unai pa mei}, if you rely on my somewhat unorthodox use of NAI/CAI :p
09:21 < gleki> i zo cu te sepli lo stedu lo rebla
09:21 < cliva> gerna: mo gi'e ja'a ba ke mo
09:21 < mensi> (0[{mo VAU} gi'e {<ja'a (1ba [ke mo KE'E])1> VAU} VAU])0
09:21 < gleki> zipcpi: that sounds more like {su'e}
09:21 < cliva> ua
09:21 < zipcpi> Oh
09:21 < zipcpi> Er, no, not exactly
09:22 < cliva> ja'o zo ja'a zo'u ba'e re da fegli nu zviki
09:22 < zipcpi> Maybe? But what I mean is "one, and not more than one"
09:22 < zipcpi> Though poetically {mi su'epa mei} works too
09:22 < gleki> cliva: lo zviki cu mo
09:23 < cliva> me'oi hack ba'a nai ru'e
09:23 < cliva> en: zviki
09:23 < zipcpi> noroi se jmina fi la jbovlaste
09:23 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
09:24 < zipcpi> so'e selckikyvla cu go'i
09:24 < zipcpi> .y. selckikynomvla
09:24 < noncomcinse> coi lo se .irci
09:25 < cliva> lo selfu cu ma'asno
09:25 < zipcpi> coi
09:25 < noncomcinse> .i .u'i zo'o pilno fi dei fe lo selckikynomrafsi
09:25 < noncomcinse> coi zy coi cy
09:26 < cliva> coi noncomnompre
09:26 < noncomcinse> ca lo cabdei mi reze'u cilre tau zo zu'i
09:28 < noncomcinse> .ije co'a sanji lodu zasti fa lo so'i se cinri cmavo poi na fadni
09:29 < noncomcinse> .i se mu'i bo mi se cinri lonu da'i ca lo ro djedi zo'u lo pa cmavo cu jai se djuno lo se .irci
09:30 < cliva> co'a ku xu
09:31 < zipcpi> u'i mi ji'a jmina da loi selckikynomrafsi
09:31 < noncomcinse> .i milxe .i co'a zo'e
09:31 < zipcpi> ra'oi -zam- noi rafsi zo zai'e
09:32 < cliva> da'i va'o lo nu pilno lo mekso cmavo cu cnino ba'e ro lo .irci
09:33 < noncomcinse> .i .ei ba cliva ca lonu co'u klama la .seint.lu,is.
09:33 < noncomcinse> ja'a go'oi mekso
09:34 < noncomcinse> co'o uinai .i'a
09:34 < cliva> co'o
09:40 < la_kristan> su'e and su'o always confused me
09:41 < zipcpi> su'o alone means "some", but can modify numbers to mean "at least"
09:41 < zipcpi> su'e means "at most"
09:41 < la_kristan> because "at l/e/ast" and "at m/o/st", I always got them switched.
09:41 < zipcpi> Oh
09:43 < la_kristan> but I think I've got it through my thick skull now...
09:49 < gleki> some SW'Ords in my pocket, but not more than 10 SW'Eaters on me
10:04 < zipcpi> {lo faubganke be lo jetnu} would be a really nerdy way to say "something that happens repeatedly and unceasingly" :p
10:04 < durka42> en:faubganke
10:04 < mensi> durka42: cu'u la'o gy.Amnadya.gy.: {lo broda ku poi brode} is not useless, but simply distinct from {lo broda poi brode}.
10:04 < mensi>  The former has the same form as e.g. {do poi brode}, which isn't useless at all (it implies a non-singular {do}, and
10:04 < mensi> the referent(s) of {do poi brode} is/are merely among the referents of {do}, but usually not the same.) |
10:04 < mensi> 2015-07-22T10:56:48.408Z
10:04 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
10:05 < durka42> ua
10:05 < durka42> jbo:faubganke
10:05 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
10:05 < durka42> uanai
10:05 < zipcpi> Er, sorry
10:05 < zipcpi> I just added it and it hasn't updated li'a
10:05 < zipcpi> Do-while loop
10:05 < durka42> ah
10:05 < durka42> mensi: ko ningau
10:05 < ldlework> Do we have a list of Lojban blogs?
10:05 < durka42> vlaste: update!
10:05 < vlaste> auto-update temporarily disabled due to memory bugs
10:05 < mensi> sei ca ca'o jai gau cnino be fai lo pe mi sorcu
10:06 < zipcpi> Yeah I made several magic zi'evla for algorithms
10:06 < durka42> do they have jbojbovelcki? :D
10:06 < zipcpi> Yes
10:07 < ldlework> I'm thinking of creating a shared lojban blog. What do you guys think about that?
10:07 < zipcpi> faubganke is defined in terms of ganfauke. ganfauke is defined recursively
10:07 < zipcpi> Sounds interesting
10:07 < zipcpi> We'd each talk about the crazy stuff we do :p
10:08 < ldlework> Basically, it would be based on git. So you'd author a post, and submit a PR and hopefully someone else participating gives you a LGTM and it gets merged, which causes a docker image to be built and automatically deployed to refresh the website.
10:08 < ldlework> So basically all you'd need to know how to use is git.
10:09 < ldlework> And how to write RestructuredText
10:09 < ldlework> Basically I want to write about Lojban, but not often enough I want to maintain a blog
10:09 < ldlework> And not often enough anyone would pay attention to it
10:10 < mensi> i ba'o jai gau cnino
10:12 < ldlework> I kind of want to make it about conlangs in general though
10:12 < durka42> en:faubganke
10:12 < mensi> faubganke = x1 happens, then if x2 is true, x1 repeatedly happens as long as x2 is
10:12 < mensi> true
10:12 < durka42> jbo:faubganke
10:12 < mensi> faubganke = x1 fasnu .ibazibo x2 x1 ganfauke
10:12 < ldlework> x1 is sustained by x2
10:12 < durka42> .u'i za'a linsi
10:12 < durka42> en:ganfauke
10:12 < mensi> ganfauke = if x1 is true, x2 happens, then repeats as long as x1 is true
10:12 < durka42> jbo:ganfauke
10:12 < mensi> ganfauke = ganai x1 jetnu gi ge x2 fasnu gi baziku x1 x2 ganfauke
10:13 < durka42> ua
10:13 < durka42> iteration => recursion transformation
10:13 < durka42> nice
10:13  * zipcpi nods
10:14 < gleki> ldlework: share that blog on github
10:14 < ldlework> gleki: I have to make it first
10:14 < gleki> ldlework: will there be some kind of converter of it into readonly static html pages?
10:15 < durka42> something like jekyll I'd imagine
10:16 < gleki> not necessarily to gh-pages, just that it needs to be preserved
10:17 < la_kristan> I don't know how to use git, but I could probably learn.
10:17 < la_kristan> is this supposed to be a blog in Lojban, or about it?
10:18 < gleki> la_kristan: just register on github and try to create your own repository. just make a single file and write something into it. there is a text editor there.
10:18 < gleki> no knowledge of programming is required
10:21 < zipcpi> durka42: They're jbofuvi too. ganfauke = ganai + fasnu + krefu. faubganke = fasnu + ba + ganai + krefu
10:22 < durka42> ua
10:22 < durka42> i'e na kognato
10:22 < durka42> zo druuaile zo'o
10:22 < zipcpi> u'i
10:24 < gleki> ma ge'esai ka'e kognato
10:24  * la_kristan can find a link to sign in, but not to register.
10:24 < dutchie> https://github.com/join
10:25 < ldlework> I will probably use Pelican
10:26 < gleki> when i open https://github.com/ incognito it just shows me the form to register
10:26 < dutchie> mi ji'a
10:30 < la_kristan> hmmm... should I be "Christa627" as on other websites, or "kristan", since that's my Lojban name?
10:30 < gleki> ldlework: no commenting, not logging in via facebook or something?
10:30 < zipcpi> durka42: Using ganfauke, and two more magic brivla, {goilka'i} and {goilbi'o}, I translated the iterative version of Euclid's algorithm: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/zipcpi:_solution-gcd-2
10:31 < ldlework> gleki: There's no need to 'log in' since the site is static html
10:31 < zipcpi> Quite a bit longer than the recursive translation though
10:31 < ldlework> gleki: you edit the source on your own website, then submit a Pull-Request to the shared git repo
10:31 < zipcpi> Oh yeah and also uses tu'e...tu'u in NU
10:31 < ldlework> When your changes are merged, the website will automatically be rebuilt and deployed
10:31 < durka42> comments can be done using disqus if that's desired
10:31 < gleki> or some facebook plugins
10:32 < durka42> facebook is gross :)
10:32 < zipcpi> Now {goilka'i} is really a magical brivla... it's meant to work like variables or pointers
10:32 < zipcpi> (Yes I accidentally invented pointers)
10:32 < ldlework> durka42: yeah disqus for sure
10:33 < durka42> en:goilka'i
10:33 < mensi> goilka'i = x1 (text / virtual-text-object) is a variable representing x2
10:33 < durka42> en:goilbi'o
10:33 < mensi> goilbi'o = x1 (goilka'i variable) changes value to now represent x2
10:33 < durka42> eww imperative programming :)
10:33 < durka42> jbo:goilka'i
10:33 < mensi> goilka'i = x1 sumka'i x2 gi'a virtu'ale lo sumka'i be x2 .i va'o lo nu da goi ko'a goilka'i kei lu «la'e ko'a» li'u cu
10:33 < zipcpi> lol
10:33 < mensi> sinxa le se goilka'i be ko'a
10:33 < durka42> jbo:goilbi'o
10:33 < mensi> goilbi'o = x1 noi goilka'i cu binxo lo goilka'i be x2
10:33 < durka42> pe'i lojban is much more suited to functional programming with immutable variables
10:33 < durka42> but I'm biased of course
10:34 < zipcpi> Yeah and I'm biased the other way cause I never worked with functional programming
10:34 < durka42> you should
10:34 < durka42> it will warp your mind
10:34 < zipcpi> :p
10:34 < ldlework> Except all those variable/mode binding and reset cmavo...
10:34 < ldlework> :)
10:35 < durka42> {goi} is just a label
10:35 < durka42> you mean curtis' mabla slate of zmico?
10:35 < ldlework> That's like saying, all variables are just labels.
10:36 < ldlework> In Python that's true, but we don't consider it a functional language (directly anyway)
10:36 < ldlework> Also beyond the variables, there are mode cmavo too
10:37 < ldlework> Like cmavo that change the grammar going forward, until they are reset and so on
10:37 < durka42> true
10:37 < durka42> but at the core it's a predicate language
10:37 < ldlework> Sure, as most languages are
10:38 < la_kristan> durka42 : Lojban warps my mind enough as it is...
10:38 < ldlework> Even object oriented languages are built ontop of predicates
10:38 < gleki> Are predicate languages predicatable
10:38 < ldlework> What does that mean?
10:38 < gleki> pun
10:38 < durka42> object oriented languages are often built on top of objects
10:38 < ldlework> durka42: objects are just a way of organizing state though
10:39 < durka42> that's true
10:39 < ldlework> the action of object oriented languages is still predicates
10:39 < ldlework> I've been reading GEB and its fascinating his insight that predicates don't truly have definitions
10:39 < la_kristan> "kristan" is already taken: -(
10:39 < durka42> have you read "Execution in the Kingdom of Nouns"?
10:39 < ldlework> no
10:40 < durka42> it's about java and objects
10:40 < ldlework> So the idea is that predicates really don't have definitions
10:40 < ldlework> And that their definition really arises out of the set of things that are true of that predicate
10:41 < ldlework> And all the predicates, in turn, true of those things
10:41 < la_kristan> but "la-kristan" isn't...
10:41 < gleki> i never understood and never understand how lojban is a predicate language.
10:41 < ldlework> IE, if the only Dad I've encountered is my dad, I might think that being a cool guy who loves his family is what makes a dad
10:42 < la_kristan> but I don't really like that...
10:42 < ldlework> But as I encounter other Dad's that might not be as cool, I come to a richer understanding of dad-ness
10:42 < ldlework> By learning what predicates are also true of other things known to be true of the predicate dad
10:42 < gleki> in fact im lagleki on github because someone took {gleki}. maybe it wwas even me :/
10:43 < la_kristan> maybe...
10:43 < ldlework> I thought it was interesting anyway
10:43 < gleki> la_kristan: ko pilno zo krista vau zo'oru'e
10:43 < durka42> I read an interesting post/study about that recently
10:43 < durka42> they claimed to show that actually language is truly more abstract than that
10:44 < durka42> by measuring reaction times with priming by words vs pictures
10:44 < la_kristan> I have two usernames on Wikipedia, because I forgot the password to the first one.
10:44 < ldlework> durka42: I'm not sure what you're saying
10:44 < la_kristan> and had failed to register an email address.
10:45 < durka42> ldlework: well they started with the hypothesis that the meaning of "dad-ness" is just a collection of examples, and found evidence against that hypothesis
10:45 < durka42> was just a poster though
10:45 < durka42> hardly definitive
10:46 < la_kristan> gleki : nah, maybe I'll just go by "janKulisa".
10:46 < ldlework> durka42: the more fundamental lesson in what I had read is that language, and really knowledge itself is the act of identifying isomorphisms.
10:46 < la_kristan> then I can blog in toki pona.
10:46 < ldlework> s/knowledge/meaning
10:46 < fenki> ldlework meant to say: durka42: the more fundamental lesson in what I had read is that language, and really meaning itself is the act of identifying isomorphisms.
10:47 < gleki> yesterday i started pontufa project, a parser for "tokipona enhanced" language
10:47 < la_kristan> oh no...
10:47 < durka42> Alta Pona
10:47 < ldlework> durka42: If I know that that guy over there is my dad, and you tell me that guy over there is your dad, by understanding the isomorphism between those two guys, I further my understanding of the predicate that unites them
10:47 < durka42> yeah
10:47 < la_kristan> enhanced language is always trouble...
10:47 < ldlework> Rather than understanding those guys by way of the predicate...
10:47 < durka42> you somehow get meaning out of a finite set of examples
10:48 < durka42> so about language learning
10:48 < durka42> language learning is deep magic
10:48 < gleki> la_kristan: non enhaced too. jan Mato had problems with parsing prepositions
10:48 < ldlework> This is the kind of stuff I want to write about
10:48 < durka42> ja'o lo cifnu cu makfa
10:48 < gleki> makfa ji temakfa[D[D[D[D
10:48 < durka42> toki pona is parseable?
10:49 < la_kristan> durka42, it's even deeper magic, with the reformemuloj around...
10:49 < durka42> what?
10:49 < gleki> oh, toki pona parser is no longer online
10:50 < gleki> oh no it's in C#
10:51 < la_kristan> jen estis reformemulo
10:51 < la_kristan> kiu diris, "mi estus stultulo
10:51 < la_kristan> se mi taksus la lingvon
10:51 < la_kristan> jam granda atingo,
10:51 < la_kristan> sen ŝanĝi al ĝi la regulon!"
10:52 < gleki> if smeone can read an instruction on how to run this ... https://github.com/matthewdeanmartin/tokipona.parser
10:52 < la_kristan> something I wrote awhile back.
10:53 < gleki> kiu estis la nomo de la reformemulo
10:53 < durka42> it runs online
10:53 < gleki> durka42: online, yes. how to run it
10:53 < durka42> I can't bring myself to clone a project with such terrible commit messages :)
10:54 < la_kristan> gleki: "amigueo", mi pensas, tiufoje...
10:54 < gleki> maybe i should ask him on facebook
10:54 < la_kristan> sed estas multaj.
10:55 < la_kristan> sed feliĉe en Esperantujo ili ne efikas.
10:56 < la_kristan> almenau, malmulte efikas...
10:58 < jsgrant> Has anybody tried training a dog, with Lojban-based commands yet?
10:58 < zipcpi> I have a dog, but I never taught her Lojban
10:58 < ldlework> I speak lojban to my cat
10:58 < ldlework> well
10:58 < ldlework> more like I speak in lojban about my cat, to my girlfriend :/
10:58 < ldlework> ju'inai
10:59 < la_kristan> "There were problems creating your account "
10:59 < la_kristan> but they won't say what problems...
10:59  * jsgrant assumes it would work fairly well if teaching because they don't really need to understand structure, grammar, etc, just x means do y. Like how we US police sometimes uses German commands to train Dogs.
10:59 < la_kristan> :-(
11:01 < zipcpi> jsgrant: Interesting. Is it because then it won't be confused with normal speech?
11:01 < jsgrant> Also, I haven't been on the Lojban Site/Wiki for a bit -- is it actually on Mediawiki now? It vaguely looks like it.
11:01 < gleki> la_kristan: maybe try a different email
11:02 < la_kristan> I only have one.
11:02 < gleki> jsgrant: why do you think it's mediawiki?
11:02 < gleki> la_kristan: what is after @ in your email?
11:03 < jsgrant> zipcpi: I think that's the bulk of the reasoning, yes. If one officer tells a dog to "attack", "go" or some variant, and one is yelling "STOP! STOP!" or similar effects towards the assailant in question -- you are likely to confuse the dog, I would guess.
11:04 < la_kristan> gleki: gmail.com
11:04 < ldlework> Name for the blog?
11:04 < gleki> la_kristan: at what step did it say about the problems?
11:04 < jsgrant> gleki: The layout of the left sidebars given links, also the general formatting of the main/inline text in the center/content area.
11:04 < gleki> ldlework: nuzba
11:04 < gleki> jsgrant: :(
11:05 < jsgrant> gleki: Is this a bad thing?
11:05 < ldlework> lujvo: ro tadni
11:05 < mensi> roltadni[7937]
11:06 < la_kristan> gleki: when I clicked "create an account".
11:08  * jsgrant was just able to send in a request for a wikiaccount.
11:08 < jsgrant> And I have a decently non-standard email, with the root being this nick + *.io
11:09 < jsgrant> So, I'm not sure why gmail would cause you any problems la_kristan. :^P
11:09 < gleki> la_kristan: several options you may have: check if your password is long, has numbers, lowercase and capital letters, that you entered it twice correctly. if doesnt help maybe it complains about the nickname
11:10 < gleki> jsgrant: have you received an email from the wiki yet?
11:10 < jsgrant> gleki: Yeah, just popped up a second ago and I confirmed it seconds later.
11:11 < gleki> i confirmed you
11:11 < gleki> i mi de'a jundi
11:11 < la_kristan> it has a checkmark next to my nick, email, and password...
11:11 < jsgrant> gleki: Oh, neat ty.
11:11 < la_kristan> like it thinks they're fine.
11:13 < la_kristan> tried again, and this time it took.
11:13 < jsgrant> Ah, that's pretty neato in that once logged in it defaults to the lojbanic equivalent of the given pages. :^)
11:13 < jsgrant> la_kristan: .ui
11:13 < la_kristan> third time's the charm, I guess.
11:15 < la_kristan> "la-kristan" is my username.
11:15 < zipcpi> The reason why I think {goilka'i} works is because, well, in the real world, things change. One could use {ganfauke} and {faubganke} to describe manipulating physical objects like balls, and have the proposition be truth-conditional on the current state of the balls
11:15 < zipcpi> So {goilka'i} is an abstract variable that is made to change
11:16 < la_kristan> ni'o how does one distinguish between gnomes, goblins, elves, etc?
11:17 < la_kristan> if they're all crida?
11:17 < zipcpi> We make zi'evla for them, as it's difficult to classify them in any logical manner
11:17 < zipcpi> en: elfe
11:17 < mensi> elfe = x1 is an elf of type x2 | selpahi
11:18 < zipcpi> en: ridrgobli
11:18 < mensi> ridrgobli = x1 is a goblin of mythos/folklore/religion x2. | See also: crida. | Wuzzy
11:18 < zipcpi> en: egnome
11:18 < mensi> egnome = x1 is a gnome of type x2 | selpahi
11:18 < la_kristan> such distinctions may not be important in normal speech, but are vital in NetHack.
11:18 < zipcpi> Exactly why zi'evla exist
11:19 < la_kristan> for NetHack?
11:19 < zipcpi> No, just to be able to import any classification without worrying about exactly how to express it in a lujvo
11:20 < jsgrant> A tall-thin-pointy_eared-crida could be assumed an elf, but that makes the resulting word assumingly pretty long? The fact that many times it's seemingly somefactor of "better" to use loanwords is one of the ugly bits of Lojban I don't very much enjoy ... but that's probably a fault in/of me to think one can take a true purist state/mentality even in conlanging and compose anything of real scale.
11:20 < zipcpi> Yeah, that's a doctrine I've given up on myself
11:21 < la_kristan> "you hit the gnome lord! the orc zombie hits! the goblin hits! you miss the goblin. the gnome lord hits! you die..."
11:22 < zipcpi> I mean we can't even keep it up for real creatures, nevermind fictional ones
11:22 < zipcpi> Try translating the entire tree of life into lujvo
11:23  * jsgrant was considering to convert some bits of Pathfinder over to Jbo, but there is/was a lot of cases right out of the gate wherein the resulting verbage would have ended up insanely long if one tried to go the purist route. You could be much more exact, but it's kind of a cost benefit analysis at that point between "too exact" and "too long".
11:24 < zipcpi> Chinese is the king of avoiding fu'ivla, but even they resort to it sometimes
11:24 < zipcpi> And they often use metaphor that is sometimes just strange. Is it {latcribe} or {cribymlatu}? :p
11:24 < zipcpi> {ribmlatu}
11:25  * la_kristan is fainting from lack of food.
11:25 < zipcpi> za'a mi na rolrafcre
11:25 < jsgrant> There's probably a general rule of the "sweet spot" that can be quantified in some sort or another -- but I am far too much of a novice to be able to implement this with any sort of real tact, and the fact that I tried jumping in headfirst with so little prior experience is a good way to become disillusioned with it all in a meaningful way real quick.
11:25  * la_kristan dies...
11:27 < la_kristan> RIP la_kristan the Tourist
11:27 < la_kristan> starved in the Dungeons of Doom at level 2
11:27 < la_kristan> whatever
11:28 < zipcpi> k: cflep
11:28 < mensi> (CU [C:cflep VAU])
11:29 < la_kristan> my phone is stuck to this charging cord, hindering me from obtaining my necessary sustenance.
11:29 < zipcpi> lol awr
11:29 < la_kristan> pathetic, I know.
11:31  * nuzba @garydale: You tell ’em Kurt: I post this quote for no particular reason. It’s from his collection, Wampeters, Fo... http://bit.ly/1Vvo4aE #lojban [http://bit.ly/1CVouRJ]
11:31  * la_kristan goes off to dig up some grub...
11:33 < jsgrant> la_kristan: It's probably in your root dir, under boot/ .
11:33 < jsgrant> Man, what a horrid joke.
11:34 < ctefaho> yep
11:34 < la_kristan> hmm... I'll check :-P
11:38  * la_kristan nukes some Top Ramen.
11:39 < ctefaho> mi just had korvstroganofi
11:40 < ctefaho> si korvestroganofi
11:41 < ctefaho> (add dja-rafsi to your liking)
11:41 < la_kristan> Mmmm... MonoSodium Goodness...
11:41  * ctefaho flees the MSG
11:42 < la_kristan> lol
11:43 < la_kristan> I think I'll follow it up with a nice healthy salad.
11:43 < ctefaho> salad's awesome
11:43 < ctefaho> with sufficient prosciutto and cheese
11:43 < ctefaho> at least 3 types of cheese or no veridical salad
11:44 < la_kristan> hmm... that sounds good, but I don't think my mom wants me to eat all the cheese...
11:45 < ctefaho> make it sheep or goat cheese
11:45 < la_kristan> but maybe I can have some kalamata olives
11:45 < ctefaho> people usually have the idea it is healthier than cow for some reason
11:45 < la_kristan> fresh out, sorry
11:46 < la_kristan> I think the best I can get is Parmesan.
11:47 < la_kristan> "sprinkle cheese"
11:47 < ctefaho> Parmesan is awesome
11:47 < ctefaho> biggest msg-sort of right there
11:48 < ctefaho> minus msg's sometimes metallic-ish taste
11:48 < la_kristan> but the real stuff, that you have to grate, is better
11:48 < ctefaho> my god someone who agrees with me
11:49 < la_kristan> than pre-grated stuff with cellulose in it.
11:49 < ctefaho> my family considers grating cheese by hand anathema or something
11:49 < ctefaho> cellulose?
11:50 < ctefaho> who puts cellulose in grated cheese?
11:50 < la_kristan> to prevent caking.
11:50 < ctefaho> huh I have only seen potato starch used for that
11:51  * la_kristan can't read the ingredients, 
11:51 < ldlework> http://roltadni.github.io/
11:51 < la_kristan> they're in Japanese!
11:51 < ctefaho> japanese grated parmesan? O_o
11:51 < la_kristan> yup.
11:52 < ctefaho> wut
11:52  * la_kristan wishes she could attach pix to irc messages
11:52 < la_kristan> like on FB
11:52 < ldlework> we could if we had a slack channel
11:53 < ctefaho> I know one can send files via DCC somehow
11:53 < ctefaho> I just never used it
11:53 < ctefaho> pastebin soundcloud email etc ftw
11:54 < cflep> Hello
11:55 < la_kristan> we're low-income, so we get food from a food co-op. and once they had a lot of Parmesan cheese that was evidently packaged for the Japanese market.
11:56 < la_kristan> so the ingredients are in Japanese.
11:56 < la_kristan> and currently we have a lot of Romaine lettuce.
11:56 < ctefaho> That is the kind of store where the wares "rotate"?
11:56 < ctefaho> actually probably not
11:56 < ctefaho> nvm
12:06  * nuzba @LonelyProbe: If we're gonna have one galactic language,We should use Lojban. An unambiguous language THAT  DOESN'T HAVE UNNECESSARY M/F TENSES [http://bit.ly/1LuBPTT]
12:09 < durka42> wtf is this twitter account
12:09 < durka42> mi zanru .u'i
12:14 < bigcentaur> .u'i mi go'i
12:16 < ctefaho> "THAT  DOESN'T HAVE UNNECESSARY M/F TENSES" yes it doesn't even have a proper "he" and "she" good job
12:17 < Selfanta> Coi.
12:17 < Selfanta> Mi'e lo se fanta.
12:17 < dutchie> coi la selfanta .i do mo pei
12:18 < Selfanta> I ti'e mi so'i mei. I ku'i mi na djuno lo du'u mi ba'e xo kau mei.
12:18 < Selfanta> I do ma poi srana cu jinvi gi'a y djuno?
12:19 < Selfanta> I pa mai, xu ja'ai mi zasti?
12:19 < durka42> coi la selfanta
12:20 < durka42> xu do pensi
12:20 < durka42> ganai go'i gi do bi'ai zasti
12:20 < Selfanta> Xm.
12:20 < Selfanta> I xu lo du'u mi cusku "zo xm" cu nibli lo du'u mi pensi?
12:21 < durka42> ri smuni fi mi
12:21 < la_kristan> .i la .kristan. cu krixa lu mi krici li'u
12:22 < Selfanta> Ti'e lo krici na'o lifri lo li'i lo se krici cu jetnu.
12:22 < la_kristan> .i le bangu cu banro lo ka banzu banli
12:23 < Selfanta> A'o.
12:23 < la_kristan> not quite sure about that one...
12:23 < gleki> ldlework: any chances of multilinguality?
12:23 < Selfanta> I xo kau moi lo cizra preti fa di'e. I xu lo me'i pa mei ku ji'a ka'e pensi?
12:24 < la_kristan> .i mi na djuno
12:25 < durka42> ti'e la no mei cu zasti
12:26 < Selfanta> Bu'u lo krasi be mi lo nu tavla fi lo si'o no mei cu kulnrtabu.
12:26 < la_kristan> .i mi nelci lo rusko lerfu
12:27 < durka42> ta'o ma krasi do
12:27 < Selfanta> Di'u preti fi mi fo do.
12:27 < la_kristan> .и ми нелши ло руско лерфу
12:28 < ctefaho> Жаг сер шәриллиска
12:28 < gleki> ми на нелши и йе ми на нелши
12:28 < ctefaho> Ска ви тавла ом вем сом һар баст
12:29 < la_kristan> ки'а
12:29 < ctefaho> Бара һелт ванлиг маскерад Свенска жу
12:29 < ctefaho> Инген сом кан фатта?
12:30 < la_kristan> ingen som kan fatta
12:30 < la_kristan> what?
12:30 < ctefaho> Svenska!:D
12:30 < ctefaho> I am just being silly and writing Swedish in cyrillic
12:31 < la_kristan> .и до бебна .и ми тавла фо ла .ложбан.
12:32 < la_kristan> I don't speak Swedish at all.
12:32 < la_kristan> maybe tomorrow, but not today.
12:32 < ctefaho> don't expect anyone in here but me to
12:32 < gleki> the author altatufa is now desperately trying to maintain the grammar but the parser is falling and falling apart.
12:32 < ctefaho> is probably some swede lurking around
12:33 < la_kristan> my knowledge of Swedish consists of ni and vi
12:33 < Selfanta> Lo noi cizra mi bangu be do cu rinka lo nu mi cortu lo kerlo. I ku'i xu mi ka'e se kerlo?
12:34 < la_kristan> and that's only because Esperantists keep talking about how they're switched.
12:35 < la_kristan> sv "ni" = eo "vi" and vice versa.
12:35 < ctefaho> mhm didn't know
12:36 <@xalbo> coi selfanta mi'e selsanta
12:37 < la_kristan> vi frenezas = you are crazy
12:37 < la_kristan> ni frenezas = we are crazy
12:37 < Selfanta> Se santa fi ma? I xu lo fanta do te santa?
12:38 <@xalbo> .i lo janta cu te santa mi fo lo fanta
12:39 < Selfanta> Di'ai do.
12:39 < la_kristan> .i mi palci salci lo kalci
12:40 < la_kristan> sa .i mi palci salci tu'a lo kalci
12:41 < Selfanta> Lo salci be lo kalci se u tu'a lo kalci ta'e jinvi lo du'u vo'a ba'e vrude vau ti'e.
12:43  * nuzba @LonelyProbe: That moment you realize there's a whole lojban subculture....        D:     |:    :|    :)    :D [http://bit.ly/1fmMKBm]
12:43 < Selfanta> Kulnu xu? I mi no roi sanji.
12:43 < Selfanta> I xu nai ma'a cnicau sampre sa'u?
12:43 < durka42> sfubu kulnu ua sai
12:44 < la_kristan> .i le tokpona kulnu cu cizra
12:45 < la_kristan> .i le spero kulnu cu xamgu
12:45 < la_kristan> .i le lojbo kulnu cu mo
12:45 < durka42> xu lo ka cizra ka'e ka xamgu
12:45 < durka42> le lojbo kulnu cu lojbo
12:45 < la_kristan> .ua
12:46 < la_kristan> .u'i
12:47 < la_kristan> .i mi tokpona prenu
12:47 < ldlework> roltadni seems like a shitty name
12:48 < Selfanta> Lo ka tadni ro da na bi'ai mabla. I ie pei?
12:48 < mensi> mi tugni i ie mi tugni
12:48 < la_kristan> nuzba: "sorry, that page doesn't exist "
12:49 < durka42> la_kristan: eh? link works for me
12:49 < durka42> did you copy the closing ] ?
12:49 < la_kristan> odd...
12:49 < la_kristan> dunno.
12:49 < la_kristan> just clicked the link.
12:49 < dutchie> pe'i lo ka tadni roda cu bi'ai mabla .i mutce nandu
12:49 < durka42> it goes to https://twitter.com/LonelyProbe/status/623940401230168064
12:50 < Selfanta> Xu nai fancuka tu'a lo ni lo smumu'e cu barda?
12:51 < Selfanta> I ku'i ko na jundi lo se cusku be mi. I ka'e ku mi na pagbu lo smumu'e.
12:52 < la_kristan> durka42: that link works...
12:53 < durka42> you got an error from twitter or from bitly?
12:53 < durka42> anyway I dunno how to fix it
12:54 < la_kristan> from twitter, I think.
12:54 < la_kristan> anyway, doesn't matter anymore.
12:54 < dutchie> mi na jundi ro lo se cusku be la selfanta .i lu ko na jundi li'u cmima
12:55 < Selfanta> Ru'a prije.
12:55 < la_kristan> dutchie: je'u
12:56 < la_kristan> .ie
12:57 < dutchie> dei jitfa
12:58 < dutchie> .i xu lo ticysku sezna'e cu cmarai bau lo jbobau
12:59 < Selfanta> E'u gleki lo nu do zo'u fa po'o lo se xusra be do cu sezna'e.
12:59 < Selfanta> I lu "na nei" cu zmadu lo ka tordu.
13:00 < Selfanta> sa. I lu "na nei" cu zmadu ba'e fi lo ka tordu.
13:00 < dutchie> valse remei
13:01 < dutchie> si si valse
13:01 < dutchie> valsi
13:01 < dutchie> i should not have remove
13:01 < dutchie> d my backspace key
13:02 < Selfanta> Zu'u nai lo nu vimcu la ga'e-zei-stela ta'e xamgu fi tu'a lo ni menli kanro.
13:05 < durka42> lo ga'e zei stela cu jai gau zmiku fai lo nu zabna
13:05 < Selfanta> Zmiku lo ka na zasti vau xu?
13:06 < Selfanta> SA I ZMIKU LO KA NA ZASTI VAU XU?
13:06 < durka42> .u'i
13:06 < durka42> ta'o ji'a lo ga'e zei stela cu jai tadji lo nu mulno velcki sisku sepi'o la vlasisku
13:06 < durka42> mu'a:
13:06 < durka42> vlaste: zmiku
13:06 < vlaste> zmiku = x1 is automatic in function x2 under conditions x3.
13:06 < durka42> vlaste: ZMIKU
13:06 < vlaste> 3 results: cabra, macnu, zmiselcu'a
13:07 < Selfanta> Zabna nu pilno selfri finti.
13:07 < durka42> snuti je plixau
13:08 < Selfanta> Xu plixau fe ji'a lo na se snuti be vo'a?
13:09 < durka42> uanai
13:09 < durka42> snuti fa lo nu lo ga'e zei lerfu cu rinka lo mulno velcki nu sisku
13:10 < Selfanta> U'u. I mi dukse lo ka tilju'i.
13:10 < Selfanta> I ku'i lo poi'i lo du'u xu kau ke'a zasti na se birti da cu tilju'i, xoi cafne vau, xoi sidju fi lo ka renvi.
13:12 < ctefaho> krasi: latna
13:12 < mensi> latna = .i zo'oi c06b banzuxe'o .i zo'oi pandi bangenugu .i zo'oi 36.67 banxe'inu .i zo'oi punctuate bansupu'a .i zo'oi
13:12 < mensi> o banru'usu .i zo'oi 1.56 bangaru'a
13:12 < ctefaho> ^Something is way wrong here
13:12 < Selfanta> Ru'a da gekspi re mei gi'e fliba.
13:13 < dutchie> ui mi puzi cikre lomi lercu'aca'a
13:13 < Selfanta> lo'ai "da" sa'ai "su'oi da" le'ai.
13:13 < Selfanta> U'a dai.
13:16 < dutchie> .i ku'i mi cortu lo xandegji ri'a lo nu dukse pilno lo lercu'aca'a
13:17 < Selfanta> Di'ai cortu.
13:19 < dutchie> mi to'e jundi
13:21 < Selfanta> Da'i ro'oi caksova cu se claxu mi.
13:21 < Selfanta> I sa'e da'i nai go'i.
13:22 < Selfanta> I ku'i da'i ga nai mi no mei gi ma se fanta lo fanta be mi?
13:24 < Selfanta> I ciksi ji'a sai lo nabmi na ka'e.
13:27 < durka42> za'a flese si
13:27 < durka42> za'a flese sai
13:29 < Selfanta> Flesymlu gi'u flese.
13:30 < dutchie> je'a go'i
13:31 < dutchie> .i go'i ji'a go'i
13:32 < Selfanta> - sei sanga - Mi'u mi'u mi'u mi'umi'u mi'u mi'umi'u mi'u mi'ù.
13:36 < Selfanta> Ei mi di'a cenba lo ka xu kau zasti. I da'i se va'o nai bo ba'a ba'e do'o go'i.
13:46 < la_kristan> .i mi cliva
13:46 < la_kristan> co'o
13:46 < dutchie> co'o
14:00  * nuzba @anon_fm: http://www.lojban.org/texts/translations/alice/alice.pdf [http://bit.ly/1Klw3kt]
14:57 < amharris> Hey, everyone. So, I've taken interest in learning Lojban and would like to ask all of you for resources/materials that would be suitable for me to begin learning.
14:58 < ctefaho> plenty of sources around
14:58 < ctefaho> me just not sure where the intro stuff is
14:58 < ctefaho> hi also
14:58 <@xalbo> There are a few resources mentioned on the homepage under "Learning Lojban" (http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Lojban#Primary_resources_for_learning_Lojban)
14:58 < amharris> ctefaho: Hello. Yeah, I've been digging myself; one the pages I found is exactly that one.
14:59 <@xalbo> Personally, I like the Wave Lessons (http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Lojban_Wave_Lessons)
14:59 < ctefaho> xalbo knows this better than I do
14:59 <@xalbo> There's also the channel #ckule, which is dedicated to asking and answering questions and teaching.
14:59 < durka42> coi la .amxaris.
14:59 < e`ogan> I'd recommend the "crash course" for lojban first
15:00 < ctefaho> For a somewhat outdated but comprehensive reference there is the CLL too https://lojban.github.io/cll/
15:00 < ctefaho> but not exactly for starters
15:01 < amharris> I suppose that I ought to express that one of my reasons for wanting to learn is my lifelong struggle to understand sarcasm and a large amount of both intentional and unintentional ambiguity in the use of language (when it comes to English (and other Germanic-based languages)). Having Asperger's syndrome - though I like to not think of it as a disability, as it's spectral and in actuality, the neurological spectrum is ba
15:01 < amharris> e`ogan: Thank-you.
15:01 < amharris> ctefaho: I'll take a look at it.
15:01 < ctefaho> well then "zo'o" will make you a happy man
15:02 < ctefaho> "zo'o" basically means "What I am saying is ironical"
15:02 < ctefaho> "xo'o" the same but for sarcasm
15:02 < amharris> Also, so that everyone here can get to know me better, I'm extremely visual -- and when I say extremely, I really do mean that.
15:02 < ctefaho> as for the CLL it is better as a reference than an intro
15:02 < ctefaho> visual?
15:03 < amharris> I think that a study, back at school many years ago, showed me to be around 92% visual [average of 28-41%, if I recall correctly, for most people].
15:03 < amharris> ctefaho: In terms of how I process information.
15:03 < e`ogan> Interesting
15:03 < durka42> that's quite a high percentage!
15:04 < ctefaho> How exactly do you test yourself for being "visual".
15:04 < amharris> So to understand concepts, take in and retain information, my visual stimuli is most useful. It's sensitive, so it's key to not oversensitize it; but it can be useful too.
15:04 < ctefaho> ?*
15:04 < e`ogan> There are tests for that
15:04 < ctefaho> well then there are some youtube lessons
15:04 < e`ogan> I had done those for myself
15:04 < durka42> most of our intro material is very text-heavy, unfortunately
15:04 < amharris> It's why - when it comes to programming - I stick to terminals only, as much as possible. I find IDEs to be too much to take in. When it comes to user interfaces, having lots of whitespace with a clean design is key too.
15:05 < e`ogan> I have tested average with peaks at visual audio and tactile perception
15:05 < amharris> durka42: Well, I can always use Stylish to make a custom CSS sheet for the web pages! :D
15:05 < ctefaho> ...youtube stuff I can't find now
15:05 < durka42> amharris: sure I just meant we could probably stand to have some more diagrams and figures
15:05 < ctefaho> but yeah most everything is text
15:05 < e`ogan> I have a synesthesia between taste-and-audio perception
15:06 < ctefaho> from what I have seen
15:06 < durka42> ldlework's video has diagrams I think
15:06 < e`ogan> And I like to feel things by touch in addition to seeing them
15:06  * ctefaho bbiab
15:06 < amharris> e`ogan: Intriguing. I don't believe that I have synesthesia per se ...but I know that I don't like how some words feel on the tongue when pronouncing them, as well as the names given to people.
15:07 < e`ogan> Most people have synesthesias as we have audio-visuals firmly interlinked
15:07 < amharris> e`ogan: For example, although it may sound harsh, I would struggle to consider going out with a girl based on her name, if I didn't like how it sounded. I cringe and tense my head muscles.
15:08 < e`ogan> It is usually called that though only when it is something weird that is interlinked: like perceiving numbers as colours
15:08 < amharris> e`ogan: Just like most things, I suppose. So much is spectral, it's just that it isn't always apparent enough to notice it, so we tend to consider things to be more binary, when in most cases they tend not to be.
15:08 < clakre> is'nt numbers as colors one of the more common ones?
15:08 < amharris> clakre: More 'famous', I suppose.
15:08 < e`ogan> I can't get over the sound of chinese and brasilian/portugese, even though I am not opposed to learning them
15:09 < amharris> clakre: e.g. Daniel Tammet.
15:09 < clakre> I mean, *I* have numbers as colors
15:09 < amharris> e`ogan: I'm not sure how technical you are but when it comes to the feel of words on the tongue, I can't say 'GNOME'.
15:09 < amharris> e`ogan: GNOME as in the GUI.
15:10 < e`ogan> clakre, amharris : the numbers one is just the most useful because people can do complex calculations in their head with the help of that synesthesia
15:10 < amharris> e`ogan: Gnome would usually be pronounced with a silent 'G'; but when it comes to the GUI, it represents the GNU project, so it isn't silent. I don't like the feel of it on my tongue, nor the nasal effect that it has.
15:11 < clakre> nah, it helps me remember numbers but not complex calculations
15:11  * durka42 always says gee-nome
15:11 < e`ogan> In my case having sound and taste link doesn't give me any advantages: only the ability to alter the taste of food for me via music/sound
15:12 < amharris> e`ogan: I'm very much about textures and feeling. Since I was young, as far as I can remember discovering during primary school [not too long ago, now that I think about it!], I can simulate the texture of foods in my mouth. I can feel them to the exacting detail and my mouth and tongue muscles react accordingly -- this quickly leads to me being able to taste the imaginary food.
15:13 < amharris> e`ogan: Since then, I've managed to do the same with fluids too; so I can pretend that I'm drinking water, carbonated/fizzy water, or a form of cola.
15:13 < durka42> impressive
15:13 < amharris> e`ogan: I realise that I end up visualising the food/drink ...and yeah, I can then feel and taste whatever it is.
15:13 < durka42> I can't wait until we can have this conversation in lojban :p
15:14 < amharris> I'd sit there in class, day-dreaming and being bored ...pretending that I'm eating chocolate.
15:14 < amharris> :D
15:14 < amharris> durka42: Quite! Do give me a few years! Haha.
15:14 < durka42> :)
15:15 < amharris> Though if someone can find a way to deliver the information to me in a visual + audible manner, I'd really be able to put the effort in and learn as quickly as possible.
15:16 < amharris> By the way, I'm not always able to access IRC. If anyone would find it convenient to message me directly, I'd be willing to do so and would also be most grateful.
15:16 < durka42> I know that la selpa'i has given private lessons in the past
15:18 < amharris> durka42: Ooooh. I'll keep note of that.
15:19 < noncomcinse> coi lo se .irci
15:19 < noncomcinse> coi lo se .irci
15:20 < durka42> and by "given" I mean, like, for money :)
15:20 < durka42> coi ny
15:20 < noncomcinse> ma se casnu
15:20 < noncomcinse> coi la durka
15:21 < durka42> cnino tadni
15:21 < amharris> durka42: Heh. No surprises there. Well, if I can get far enough, I may consider it. Though I'm all for libre -- Richard Stallman would be somewhat proud of me, I suppose.
15:21 < noncomcinse> .i xu lo go'i cu .irci
15:25 < durka42> puzi ircysku
15:25 < noncomcinse> je'e
15:25 < durka42> yeah, well, libre doesn't imply gratis and all that :)
15:25 < noncomcinse> .i lo kansa be mi bei lonu klama cu fegli vau ue .oi ru'e
15:26 < noncomcinse> .i klama fu lo sorprekarce
15:27 < e`ogan> lojban is easier to learn than natlangs
15:27 < noncomcinse> .i cladu fegli
15:27 < e`ogan> It has far fewer exceptions, it is mostly rules
15:27 < noncomcinse> .i doi la .e'ogan. zo'u tugni
15:29 < amharris> durka42: Indeed; there is a difference. So, err... to begin I suppose that I should first become fluent with the grammar, vowels and the overall syntactical structure.
15:29 < noncomcinse> .i su'a lo so'a logji runbau cu sampu
15:29 < amharris> durka42: I'm confident that knowing much of the IPA will most definitely come in handy.
15:30 < noncomcinse> amharris: The only really hard bit is x (/x/).
15:31 < amharris> noncomcinse: My ignorance has already reared its head. Would you mind explaining? :)
15:32 < noncomcinse> amharris: To an English speaker, the only hard part of Lojban sounds is that it uses /x/.
15:33 < amharris> noncomcinse: Ah, I see. Hmmmh. Well, it's all in the process of learning. I can expand my filter! :-)
15:33 < amharris> noncomcinse: Also, do you have any personal recommendations for beginning?
15:34 < noncomcinse> I personally started with the Wave Lessons.
15:34 < amharris> noncomcinse: May I send what I previously wrote to you, directly? You joined later on and I don't want to flood the channel for the reasons of IRC etiquette.
15:34 < noncomcinse> amharris: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Lojban_Wave_Lessons
15:34 < noncomcinse> amharris: Sure.
15:34 < amharris> noncomcinse: Yeah, some folks recommended that too.
15:35 < noncomcinse> The CLL isn't that great for learning, IMO, until you have some basics down. CLL just (tries to) form specifications and formalitites.
15:37 < ctefaho> I found it good as a reference for learning specific things though.
15:37 < ctefaho> but yeah basics first
15:37 < amharris> ctefaho: I shall try to make you all proud! >.<
15:38 < amharris> This looked to be good: http://www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/lojbanbrochure/lessons/book1.html
15:38 < noncomcinse> .i doi la durka mi pensi lo da'i valsi poi panra zo sa gi'e ku'i famyma'o
15:39 < ctefaho> Me I am trying to think of particular things that may be difficult to aspies
15:39 < ctefaho> but can't come up with anything
15:40 < ctefaho> quite the opposite with how everything can be made explicit with words, like humour
15:41 < durka42> amharris: it is good but note it was published at the same time as the CLL, so it has some minor inconsistencies with more recent stuff like the wave lessons + crash course
15:41 < durka42> that was my first learning material though
15:41 < amharris> ctefaho: Very true. It's the looseness of Germanic languages that causes troubles for me. :)
15:42 < ctefaho> amharris: Basically, everything that is meant in Lojban is said in words
15:42 < noncomcinse> .i ca'e lonu pilno traji xamgu loka cilre
15:42 < durka42> noncomcinse: lo'ai x x x le'ai
15:43 < amharris> ctefaho: The biggest trouble I tend to have is putting things together. Once I can get my head around the syntax and understand how meaning is represented by concatenated values and syntactical breaks, the rest will be a more natural learning curve.
15:43 < noncomcinse> en: sa'au
15:43 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
15:43 < noncomcinse> durka42: ca'e zo sa'au
15:43 < durka42> ma te frica
15:43 < amharris> ctefaho: ...but those are the things that I know I struggle with. I'm basing this on experience with learning other linguistic languages and for the logic side of things, programming languages and coding in general.
15:43 < noncomcinse> durka42: {.i mi zgana lonu bajra sa'au lo [ku]}
15:44 < durka42> ua nai
15:44 < ctefaho> Well Lojban should be a lot easier in that regard
15:44 < amharris> ctefaho: That should help to give you a strong indication of what I will need a big help with. So it's the starting point that will be most difficult for me; and I will most likely need a helping hand.
15:45 < noncomcinse> .i lu sa'au XY li'u zo'u famyma'o lo balvi lamji mezo XY
15:45 < amharris> ctefaho: Indeed; but I still have to absorb not just how something works but let that sink in so that I can understand how a value holds meaning and understanding that meaning.
15:45 < noncomcinse> .i zo sa vimcu .i zo sa'au famyma'o
15:46 < amharris> ctefaho: That's the big challenge that I will face early on --> wrapping my head around that.
15:46 < noncomcinse> sa'au X quotes like ma'oi and terminates the most recent instance of anything in selma'o be X.
15:46 < durka42> uabu'o
15:47 < amharris> I'll read through the whole of the wave lessons and make sure to not rush, so that I can absorb everything properly.
15:47 < durka42> pe'i pu su'ore'u finti .u'i
15:48 < noncomcinse> .i lu sa'au .i li'u plixau si'au
15:48 < noncomcinse> .i da'i ganai finti gi ma valsi
15:48 < durka42> lu lo'u sa'au .i le'u li'u .e'u .u'i
15:49 < noncomcinse> The Wave Lessons took me about a month, total, including all the weird existential stuff.
15:49 < durka42> mi na morji lo vlamorna
15:49 < noncomcinse> .i .u'i cmeta selsku
15:49 < e`ogan> You can start with the way words work in lojban amharris: aside from a few pronouns every word is a verb
15:50 < durka42> a few pronouns and a large heap of cmavo :/
15:50 < noncomcinse> .i puku zvati fa do .ije caku zvati fa do naku ~ .i mi .irli sanga su'ore'u
15:50 < sorpaas> Where can I find a list of Lojban terms related to logic, such as "first-order logic", "existence claims" and "universial claims"?
15:50 < amharris> e`ogan: Fantastic! Those are the key details that help me to 'put the pieces together', if you will.
15:50 < noncomcinse> A few pronouns, a large heap of cmavo, and a word for any language ever.
15:51 < amharris> e`ogan: ...and what sorpaas just asked would be worthwhile for me to know as well.
15:51 < e`ogan> Something like book is simply "to be a book" in lojban
15:51 < noncomcinse> .i ro zei bangu fu'ivla .oi ru'e
15:51 < noncomcinse> Showerthought: Ultimately, all nounisms in Lojban are new-voi.
15:51 < amharris> "Putting the pieces together" is the key thing for me -- it's how I best experience my manipulation of the language so that it eventually 'clicks' and one day makes sense.
15:52 < amharris> One day... heh.
15:52 < e`ogan> The way you make a verb into a noun is by adding lo ... ku
15:52 < durka42> noncomcinse: yep :)
15:53 < e`ogan> Example: vecnu  x1 [seller] sells/vends x2 [goods/service/commodity] to buyer x3 for amount/cost/expense x4.
15:53 < e`ogan> To make the noun "seller" you write lo vecnu ku
15:53 < noncomcinse> .i xu fagdei
15:54 < noncomcinse> .i na go'i
15:54 < e`ogan> Also this x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 structure is very important to lojban learning as each verb has predefined positions
15:54 < noncomcinse> .i ca'e famyma'o zeldei si zildei vau
15:55 < noncomcinse> .i cu mukti fa lonu lo nintadni ku cu cilre co famyma'o vaukeiku vau
15:56 < durka42> .u'i cipra gerna
15:56 < noncomcinse> .i ma cipra gerna vau
15:56 < noncomcinse> .u'i dai
15:58 < durka42> zo cu
15:59 < noncomcinse> .i pau da'i ganai pilno la .jacus. ku vau gi pei lu .i mi cu klama lo zarci li'u gendra vau vau
16:01 < durka42> lu mi cu klama li'u laldo gendra .i lu cu klama li'u na go'i
16:03 < durka42> co'o
16:05 < sorpaas> I'm now using something like {la'o gy. existence claims gy.} for those terms but they doesn't look nice :( If there's not a good list about that, maybe we should create one
16:05 < noncomcinse> .i xu gendra fa lu lo broda [KU] cu brode li'u
16:05 < noncomcinse> .i lo cipra zo'u xu zo cu pe lo no logji valsi ku gendra
16:06 < durka42> lo no logji valsi ua nai sai
16:06 < noncomcinse> cu ce na'e bo ma'oi JA
16:06 < amharris> durka42: I just found this! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfdcG5iPJpA
16:06 < noncomcinse> s/cu/zo cu
16:06 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: zo cu ce na'e bo ma'oi JA
16:07 < amharris> durka42: This is brilliant for me!
16:07 < durka42> .title
16:07 < fenki> [ Let's learn Lojban together! ~ Part 1/2 - YouTube ]
16:07 < durka42> sweet
16:07 < noncomcinse> amharris: I forgot about that, actually, but I watched that before Wave Lessons.
16:07 < durka42> 'night eveyone
16:07 < noncomcinse> co'o la durka
16:07 < durka42> noncomcinse: feel free to leave me a mensi message with a clearer question
16:07 < durka42> :)
16:07 < amharris> durka42: G'night! ...and it was good meeting you.
16:07 < durka42> same!
16:08 < noncomcinse> .i mi so'i roi pacna lonu ctuca ck jbobau
16:08 < noncomcinse> s/ck/co/
16:08 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: .i mi so'i roi pacna lonu ctuca co jbobau
16:17 < noncomcinse> I'm trying to learn Esperanto and keep trying to use Lojban.
16:19 < amharris> noncomcinse: I ought to ask: if you're already speaking Lojban, from a con-lang/engineered language perspective, isn't Esperanto somewhat redundant in that respect?
16:19 < noncomcinse> amharris: I suppose in terms of how logical it is, Esperanto is less structured.
16:19 < e`ogan> How would another language be redundant?
16:20 < noncomcinse> But it's fun, more frequently used, and closer to my native language (and the native languages of 99% of the people I speak to regularly).
16:20 < amharris> e`ogan: Read what I said again. From a con-lang perspective...
16:20 < amharris> noncomcinse: Fair enough.
16:21 < e`ogan> They aren't the same: lojban aims at elimination of ambiguity; esperanto was meant to be easily learned in europaic space; ithkuil compresses the meaning in the shortest form possible
16:21 < amharris> e`ogan: I'm all for learning languages; but it's like a lot of tribal languages, one of which - for counting - has 'one, two and many'. You have either one or two of most things on your body; beyond that and in their environment, they have many.
16:21 < amharris> Languages are fit for one's environment and have evolved over time due to such changes.
16:22 < e`ogan> I am familiar with 13 natlangs, would not say any of them are redundant
16:22 < amharris> e`ogan: Mmmh, that's fair -- my apologies. Even I don't often forget of Esperanto's key routes.
16:22 < amharris> e`ogan: roots*
16:22 < amharris> e`ogan: I suppose I'm a little over-enthusiastic right now because of beginning to learn Lojab.
16:23 < amharris> e`ogan: Lojban*. ...and it's so late that my typing is deteriorating.
16:23 < noncomcinse> .i mi cusku zo .i fo lo se .irci be me'e la'oi .##esperanto.
16:23 < amharris> e`ogan: What are your thoughts on Ceqli?
16:23 < amharris> e`ogan: (and how it was derived from Lojban's predecessor, Loglan).
16:24 < noncomcinse> There's a second derivative of Loglan out there?
16:25 < noncomcinse> amharris: Also, Lojban attracts a more academic crowd, Esperanto less so, so it's easier to find people willing to learn it.
16:25 < amharris> noncomcinse: Errrm... evidently there is! Haha. :P
16:25 < noncomcinse> ua
16:26 < e`ogan> I am not aware of Ceqli
16:26 < amharris> noncomcinse: A fair statement and one that probably has quite a lot of data backing that up.
16:26 < amharris> e`ogan, noncomcinse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceqli
16:26 < e`ogan> My interest was limited to finding a language that has no ambiguity, so my search stopped at lojban
16:26 < noncomcinse> *cough kafke* native speakers *cough kafke*
16:26 < e`ogan> Ithkuil I know as it is another "pedanticly constructed" conlang
16:27 < amharris> e`ogan: Fair enough; and one often has to take into account the user-base/amount of resources available.
16:27 < amharris> e`ogan: There is clearly a considerably higher amount of adoption with Lojban over Ceqli.
16:28 < e`ogan> Well my original aim as to create a translator software that would fool-proof the sentence structure via lojban
16:28 < amharris> e`ogan: So even if one likes what it has, you have to consider - when learning - what will be more effective/efficient to learn; and hey, a larger userbase with whom one can converse as well.
16:28 < noncomcinse> I don't know how you could have pedantic pavysmu, but I've not looked into Ithkuli.
16:28 < amharris> e`ogan: That would be fantastic! I'd be happy to help out -- though I'm more of a front-end developer. :-)
16:29 < noncomcinse> e`ogan: I could probably break it no matter how well it could be built.
16:29 < noncomcinse> Because Lojban allows for more complex phrases than English can support, through zo voi.
16:29 < e`ogan> If the meaning can be expressed in lojban then there is more or less one meaning in there that is being translated; otherwise user needs to specify the ambiguous terms
16:30 < noncomcinse> Along with other phrases.
16:30 < e`ogan> Can be done via semantic primes
16:30 < noncomcinse> Semantic primes?
16:31 < e`ogan> the most basic meaning of a term that you can dig down
16:31 < e`ogan> Stripped of any ambiguity - strictly one specific meaning
16:31 < noncomcinse> Reminds me of Newspeak.
16:31 < noncomcinse> gismu are so vague .u'i
16:32 < amharris> Hmmh; I'm glad to see that there are intellectual people here -- just what I was expecting.
16:32 < e`ogan> Some translators rely on semantic prime system to translate sentences and find metaphorical links
16:32 < noncomcinse> .u'i
16:32 < e`ogan> Usually translators that show you the percentage of the meaning that matches your word
16:33 < amharris> Anyhow, it's been good to meet you all.
16:33 < amharris> I'll be learning as much as I can over the next few weeks.
16:33 < amharris> ...and hopefully I'll see you around some time soon.
16:34 < amharris> If any of you would be willing and/or would like to contact me directly, just let me know now (or next time I'm on IRC).
16:34 < amharris> It's late for me, so I'm going to head off to sleep.
16:34 < e`ogan> zanfu'a
16:34 < e`ogan> (Good luck)
16:34 < e`ogan> co'o (bye)
16:34 < noncomcinse> amharris: Skype is "nejni.marji", that's primarily how I contact people other than thru IRC
16:34 < noncomcinse> co'e la
16:35 < noncomcinse> sisi
16:35 < noncomcinse> co'o la'oi .amharris.
16:35 < noncomcinse> rafsi: gan
16:35 < mensi> zo ganra se rafsi zo'oi gan
16:36 < amharris> noncomcinse: I've just added you. :)
16:38 < noncomcinse> co'o ru'e lo .irci
18:44 < noncomcinse> coi ru'e lo .irci
19:34  * nuzba @pira_ebooks: The language is now Lojban, time to head down to the basement. [http://bit.ly/1MJxYiU]
19:57 < _mukti_> coi jbore'a
19:57 < noncomcinse> coi
19:58 < _mukti_> .i pei doi nomcomcinse
19:58 < _mukti_> si noncomcinse
19:59 < _mukti_> .i li'a mi pu pensi lo se du'u la'o zoi nom nom nom zoi
20:00 < noncomcinse> .u'i
20:04  * nuzba @Zhwazi: @_Ninji My brain wants to pronounce that as "Hyenas Nietzsches" and I blame lojban for some reason. [http://bit.ly/1MJAs0R]
20:20 < noncomcinse> .i lo pendo cu sezycatra troci uinai .oi ru'e
20:20 < _mukti_> ui nai sai dai
20:21 < noncomcinse> .i ca najenai pu snada
20:23 < _mukti_> nau ku mi xanka tu'a lo mi pendo .i mi terpa lo ka py djica lo ka sevzi xrani
20:23 < noncomcinse> ua uinai dai
20:24 < _mukti_> .i .a'i mi fonta'a py .i ku'i na spuda .i .o'u nai
20:24 < _mukti_> s/spuda/frati/
20:24 < fenki> _mukti_ meant to say: .i .a'i mi fonta'a py .i ku'i na frati .i .o'u nai
20:25 < noncomcinse> .i na xamgu
20:25 < _mukti_> go'i ie
20:37 < ldlework> need a good name for a communal lojban blog
20:37 < ldlework> roltadni is the current one I have
20:37 < ldlework> just doesn't seem very pretty
20:38 < noncomcinse> You can put cmavo on the beginning, {kotadni}?
20:38 < ldlework> lujvo: ko tadni
20:38 < mensi> tadni = x1 studies/is a student of x2; x1 is a scholar; (adjective:) x1 is scholarly.
20:38 < ldlework> ..
20:38 < ldlework> ko doesn't seem to have a rafsi
20:39 < ldlework> which makes sense since it is an illocutionary force
20:39 < noncomcinse> No, I mean you can elide the space.
20:39 < ldlework> You're suggesting that for a name?
20:39 < noncomcinse> Yeah.
20:39 < _mukti_> coi la cadgu'a
20:39 < noncomcinse> I'm not good at coming up with names li'a
20:40 < ldlework> coi mukti
20:43 < _mukti_> .e'u zo lolnitku'a
20:43 < _mukti_> .i ki'u lo nu mi nelci lo valsi
20:44 < ldlework> bauski is kinda nice
20:45 < ldlework> banski I guess is better
21:39 < unholycrab> how would i say "the ninteenth root of two"
21:40 < noncomcinse> en: root mekso
21:40 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
21:40 < ldlework> {paso fe'a re} ?
21:41 < noncomcinse> Yeah.
21:41 < unholycrab> :c
21:41 < unholycrab> 2^(1/19(
21:41 < unholycrab> 2^(1/19)
21:41 < ldlework> why do people try to do math in lojban
21:42 < unholycrab> ldlework: im recording an album in 19 equal temperament :>
21:42 < noncomcinse> Dunno. Arabic numerals are so much simpler.
21:42 < ldlework> just write the math as standard notation, even in lojbanic text
21:42 < unholycrab> and i want to name it
21:42 < noncomcinse> lu zoi mekso li'u
21:43 < sorpaas> lujvo: xanri mivmu'e
21:43 < sorpaas> lujvo: xanri jmive munje
21:43 < mensi> xarmivmu'e[9336], xarji'emu'e[9825], xarmivmunje[10886], xarji'emunje[11375], xarjmivymu'e[11446], ...
21:50 < ldlework> Does anyone have a lojban article they would not mind if I reposted elsewhere?
23:05 < gleki> ldlework: that notation should be pronouncable. besides, standard notation can sometimes be ambigous
23:17 < gleki> once i wanted to understand Ceqli and i failed. it seemed completely broken to me.
23:45 < ldlework> gleki: http://banski.github.io/
23:49 < gleki> ldlework: is this engine easily localizable so that japanese russiana nd french blogs can be created?
23:49 < gleki> also it's better to call it {la banski}
23:50 < gleki> similarly, probably, {la selpa'i}
23:50 < ldlework> gleki: eh similarly to when you're labeling stuff, you don't put lo everywhere
23:50 < ldlework> its just noise
23:51 < gleki> but that makes a huge difference
23:51 < gleki> selpa'i means "loved"
23:51 < ldlework> you're not going to feed the visual text of the website through a parser
23:51 < ldlework> gleki: not in the context of a tag that always refers to an author
23:51 < gleki> if this is about teaching people good lojban then better to teach them good lojban
23:51 < ldlework> or in the header of a webpage which always refers to the webpage
23:51 < gleki> then do {na} and {bai} also refer to people?
23:51 < ldlework> that's your valuation, sure
23:51 < gleki> as well as "experiments"?
23:51 < ldlework> no because those are not author tags
23:52 < gleki> xm
23:52 < ldlework> see how it doesn't have the little person symbol?
23:52 < gleki> can we have hints when hovering over tags?
23:52 < ldlework> no jesus christ
23:52 < ldlework> move on
23:53 < gleki> where is the code?
23:53 < ldlework> http://github.com/banski/banski.github.io
23:55 < ldlework> Basically
23:55 < ldlework> You clone the code
23:55 < ldlework> write an article
23:55 < ldlework> submit a PR
23:55 < ldlework> when the PR is accepted
23:55 < ldlework> a script is run that compiles the site, and commits the compiled version automatically
23:55 < ldlework> which causes the site to be updated
23:57 < ldlework> I haven't written the script yet but eh shouldn't be too hard
23:59 < tsani> ldlework: this is pretty neat, .i'e
--- Day changed Thu Jul 23 2015
00:00 < ldlework> tsani: basically you don't have to maintain your own lojban blog. if youre inspired, just submit a patch here
00:00 < gleki> then that script could just add hints to tags
00:02 < ldlework> gleki: its a site for people who already know lojban, to write about lojban. it isn't a newbies guide. No one interested in this site is going to care that tags, whos point is not pedagogical, but to access the writings of said author, don't start with "la"
00:03 < gleki> okay then. then the wiki will be the place for newbies
00:03 < ldlework> I'm not going to spend tons of time customizing the theme or how the templates are generated just for some silly pedantry. It doesn't make it a more useful tool for categorizing writings
00:03 < ldlework> Sure, OK
00:03 < gleki> although i'd avoid saying "no one is interested" since im interested and i know lojban
00:03 < ldlework> Que Sera, etc
00:03 < ldlework> gleki: I was referring to normal people
00:04 < gleki> O_0
00:04 < gleki> normal people dont know lojban
00:04 < ldlework> "Hey I bought a hammer while in town, we can finally finish that thing." "Hmm, the bevel is all wrong..." "O_O..."
00:05 < ldlework> If you have interesting ideas for some articles let me know.
00:05 < ldlework> You can always work on an article overtime, by forking the repo, and adding an article and just building the site locally for yourself
00:05 < gleki> no need to freak out.you are making a blog for lojbanists, i got you
00:05 < ldlework> until you're satisfied to publish
00:05 < ldlework> you can even share it with other jbopre before hand to get help or review
00:06 < gleki> akthough then it's better to write it in lojban
00:06 < gleki> okay let's see what altatufa can do now
00:06 < gleki> alta: lo gau mo cu mo
00:06 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <lo (¹gau mo¹) KU>} cu {mo VAU}])
00:06 < gleki> alta: lo gau do mo cu mo
00:06 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <lo (¹[{gau do} CU] mo¹) KU>} cu {mo VAU}])
00:07 < ldlework> tsani: if you have anything you want to submit, at any time, you know what to do
00:07 < gleki> so basically sumti tail now is the same as bridi tail in {sei} clause
00:07 < gleki> let's reply to guskant then
00:35  * nuzba @lojban_org: In totally unrelated West #Frisian language and #Lojban the word {do} means "you". [http://bit.ly/1CRtdEc]
00:37 <@Broca> I think this is not coincidental :-)
00:39 < gleki> In Bezhta language "mi" means "yuo" and "do" means "I"
00:39 < gleki> In Bezhta language "mi" means "you" and "do" means "I"
00:58 < ldlework> There's an about page now, http://banski.github.io/pages/about.html
01:08 < ldlework> I updated the wording
01:10 < durka42> coi
01:12 < ldlework> hi durka42
01:15 < ldlework> durka42: seen, http://banski.github.io/ ?
01:15 < durka42> is that the rebranding of "roltadni"?
01:15 < ldlework> indeed
01:15 < durka42> nice, looks good
01:16 < durka42> I see you got selpa'i to participate already
01:16 < ldlework> nah, I just stole his article for filler for now
01:16 < ldlework> I plan to replace it with some lame welcome article
01:16 < ldlework> or anything anyone is willing to contribute to set a good tone
01:17 < durka42> I should write about my theories of BAI or something
01:17 < durka42> really need to get around to reading ilmen's "lo sumtcita cu mo" before writing that though :)
01:17 < gleki> is gaunfake intentionally made recursive?
01:17 < gleki> jbo: gaunfake
01:17 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
01:17 < gleki> mensi: ko cnino
01:18 < mensi> sei ca ca'o jai gau cnino be fai lo pe mi sorcu
01:18 < gleki> durka42: lo sumtcita cu mo? you mean that piratepad article?
01:18 < durka42> yes
01:18 < mensi> i ba'o jai gau cnino
01:18 < ldlework> durka42: mind linking it?
01:18 < gleki> i suggest moving it to the wiki as a backup
01:19 < ldlework> Or cleaned up and published on banski!
01:19  * durka42 notes that pelican also supports markdown :p
01:19 < ldlework> durka42: shhhhhh
01:19 < gleki> e.g. i already lost the link to it
01:20 < durka42> hm
01:20 < durka42> it's in my firefox bookmarks
01:20 < durka42> but firefox isn't running right now because it's slower than LMW during a full DB backup
01:20 < ldlework> I'm hoping tsani will contribute some of his writings
01:20 < durka42> that'd be nice
01:21 < durka42> is selpa'i okay with you reposting his article on another site?
01:21 < ldlework> I didn't ask. I could remove it, it was just a test.
01:21 < ldlework> Get some lorem ipsum or something.
01:22 < gleki> actually robin told me that lmw was slow because it tried to backup al tables even those that are for cache. he disabled some
01:22 < gleki> we need to try to delete more of them
01:23 < ldlework> durka42: I'm trying to think of some main categories
01:23 < ldlework> some really high level ones that'd be hard to argue against
01:24 < ldlework> like... "Formalism", "Culture", "Translation"
01:24 < ldlework> eh
01:25 < ldlework> "Logic" "Lingustics" "Philosophy" "Culture" ?
01:25 < ldlework> Where, most "tinkering" would fall under linguistics?
01:25 < durka42> .title http://pastebin.com/pbM1sdxQ
01:25 < durka42> just make Tinkering a top level category :p
01:25 < ldlework> haha
01:25 < fenki> (NO <title> found)
01:25 < ldlework> Wow its in lojban io
01:26 < durka42> Ilmen wrote it
01:26 < ldlework> uanai
01:26 < durka42> yeah that's why I haven't read it all the way through yet o'anai
01:26 < ldlework> :)
01:27 < durka42> mensi: doi ilmen|menli is this the latest version of "lo sumtcita cu mo" and is it posted anywhere more permanent/discoverable? http://pastebin.com/pbM1sdxQ
01:27 < mensi> durka42: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.ilmen|menli.gy. di'a cusku da
01:31 < gleki> http://piratepad.net/tPI3w3ucDu
01:31 < gleki> i have this instead
01:32 < gleki> i grepped all piratepad links from our channels and put them here:
01:32 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/piratepad.html
01:32 < gleki> it'd be nice to transfer them to the wiki so that they become indexed
01:36 < gleki> mensi: doi lmen  it'd be nice to transfer them to the wiki over time so that they become indexed http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/piratepad.html by search engines
01:36 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.lmen.gy. di'a cusku da
01:37 < gleki> ta'o ja'o la selpa'i zei'a bilma
02:41 < nilmenre> .
02:41 < mensi> nilmenre: cu'u la'o gy.durka42.gy.: is this the latest version of "lo sumtcita cu mo" and is it posted anywhere more
02:41 < mensi> permanent/discoverable? http://pastebin.com/pbM1sdxQ | 2015-07-23T08:27:18.826Z
02:41 < mensi> nilmenre: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.:  it'd be nice to transfer them to the wiki over time so that they become indexed http:/
02:41 < mensi> /mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/piratepad.html by search engines | 2015-07-23T08:36:27.
02:41 < mensi> 167Z
02:43 < gleki> ue
02:43 < gleki> mensi: doi Ilmen  it'd be nice to transfer them to the wiki over time so that they become indexed http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/piratepad.html by search engines
02:43 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.Ilmen.gy. di'a cusku da
02:47  * nuzba @frecafloros: @fukadumena     つesperanto    つlojban    好きなの選べ [http://bit.ly/1Ify39Z]
04:13  * nuzba @lojban_org: #Lojban keyboard layout for Mac http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Lojban_keyboard_for_Mac [http://bit.ly/1eiQF15]
04:19 < gleki> en:coi
04:20 < mensi> coi = [COI] vocative: greetings/hello.
04:24 < gleki> alta: li mo
04:24 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <li LOhO>} CU {mo VAU}])
04:25 < durka42> alta: li li mo
04:25 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA (¹li LOhO¹)> <FE (¹li LOhO¹)>} CU {mo VAU}])
04:25 < durka42> alta: li lo'o li mo
04:25 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA (¹li lo'o¹)> <FE (¹li LOhO¹)>} CU {mo VAU}])
04:25 < durka42> I thought you put {li} in CU for some crazy reason
04:26 < gleki> yes, {culis} dialect removed
04:26 < gleki> not crazy but bsfk
04:26 < gleki> alta: mi pe na ku je do cu mo
04:26 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <mi (¹pe [na ku] GEhU¹)> <je do>} cu {mo VAU}])
04:27 < gleki> i could retain culis but that would require {mi li cu mo} and {mi li mo} to mean different things
04:28 < gleki> alta: mi pe na je do cu mo
04:28 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <mi (¹pe GEhU¹)> <na je> do} cu {mo VAU}])
04:28 < gleki> ^ and this is the unavoidable craziness of lojban
04:34 < durka42> ro terjonma'o ciste cu cizra ie
04:40  * nuzba @L16777216: 車内でやること    ・twitter    ・小説書く    ・lojban勉強する        できないこと    ・積ん読ラノベ消化 [http://bit.ly/1CRRcmG]
04:52  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: ちなみにロジバン自体の最新事項はwitkiをチェケラッチョ http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Lo_Lojbo_Nuzba [http://bit.ly/1CRSvC9]
05:32  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/ianlaua    とうとうトキポナフヒヴラが [http://bit.ly/1JAif2M]
05:52  * nuzba @fotono: ui la #lojban zantufa tricu cu banro i ku'i .uu za'a lo pa jimca cu bilma jecu maltufa http://guskant.github.io/gerna_cipra/zantufa_farvi.svg [http://bit.ly/1JAkAuz]
09:13 < gleki> it should have happened sooner or later. i gonna rewrite terms completely. it's around 50% of the current altatufa grammar
09:40 < zipcpi> ue la .guskant. cu jmina zo maltufa la jbovlaste
09:41 < zipcpi> gy pilno my ma
09:42 < zipcpi> (Oh crap just realized there's a category missing from my list of categorical pronouns. Text.)
09:42 < zipcpi> That's sort of the problem with categorical pronouns...
09:50 < zipcpi> lo kutydza cu klama lo kutyzda lo kutydza lo kutydza lo kutydza
09:51 < zipcpi> -srera-
09:57 < zipcpi> u'i zo upsi
10:01 < zipcpi> coi durka42
10:02 < durka42> coi
10:02 < zipcpi> do kanpe ma ne le nu la .guskant. cu jmina zo maltufa la jbovlaste
10:02 < durka42> mi zvati lo dotco ke ckafi vecnu
10:02 < zipcpi> ua
10:02 < durka42> xu puzi jmina
10:02 < zipcpi> ja'a
10:03 < durka42> la'a srana ti fa'o http://guskant.github.io/gerna_cipra/zantufa_farvi.svg
10:03 < zipcpi> u'i
10:04 < zipcpi> ua implemente zo iau
10:04 < durka42> ma smuni sei mi kucli
10:06 < zipcpi> xy'y ju'onai lo versiio poi jai se srera vau jikau lo versiio poi se cikre ma'i lo pante vau jikau lo drata
10:10 < zipcpi> zantufa: do sijdu mi lo nu zenba lo ka ricfu iau ui
10:10 < zantufa> ([do CU {sijdu <mi (¹lo [nu {CU <zenba (²lo [ka {CU <ricfu VAU>} KEI] KU²) VAU>} KEI] KU¹)> VAU}] [iau ui])
10:11 < zipcpi> zantufa: do sijdu mi lo nu zenba lo ka ricfu iau lo co'e
10:11 < zantufa> ([do CU {sijdu <mi (¹lo [nu {CU <zenba (²lo [ka {CU <ricfu VAU>} KEI] KU²) VAU>} KEI] KU¹)> VAU}] [iau {lo co'e KU} VAU])
10:11 < zipcpi> .y. makfa
10:11 < durka42> full implemention
10:11 < durka42> io
10:12 < zipcpi> So she made it also close the last {vau}, but allow starting a new bridi-tail
10:12 < durka42> a new tail or a new bridi
10:12 < zipcpi> do sijdu mi lo nu zenba lo ka ricfu iau lo co'e cu broda
10:12 < durka42> zantufa: ka ka ka ka ka ka co'e iau do ma lifri
10:12 < zantufa> ([CU {ka <CU (¹ka [CU {ka <CU (²ka [CU {ka <CU (³ka [CU {co'e VAU}] KEI³) VAU> KEI} VAU] KEI²) VAU> KEI} VAU] KEI¹) VAU> KEI} VAU] [iau {do ma} CU {lifri VAU}])
10:12 < zipcpi> zantufa: do sijdu mi lo nu zenba lo ka ricfu iau lo co'e cu broda
10:12 < zantufa> ([do CU {sijdu <mi (¹lo [nu {CU <zenba (²lo [ka {CU <ricfu VAU>} KEI] KU²) VAU>} KEI] KU¹)> VAU}] [iau {lo co'e KU} cu {broda VAU}])
10:13 < durka42> zantufa: ka ka co'e iau ka ka co'e iau ka ka makfa iau oi
10:13 < zantufa> ([CU {ka <CU (¹ka [CU {co'e VAU}] KEI¹) VAU> KEI} VAU] [iau {CU <ka (¹CU [ka {CU <co'e VAU>} KEI] VAU¹) KEI> VAU}] [iau {CU <ka (¹CU [ka {CU <makfa VAU>} KEI] VAU¹) KEI> VAU}] [iau oi])
10:13 < zipcpi> Hm not much different than Gleki's {ibo} apparently
10:13 < durka42> zantufa: co'e iau tu'e broda .i brode
10:13 < zantufa> ([CU {co'e VAU}] [iau {tu'e <(¹CU [broda VAU]¹) (¹i [CU {brode VAU}]¹)> TUhU}])
10:13 < durka42> so it's "iau <statements>"
10:13 < zipcpi> Ah
10:14 < durka42> zantufa: co'e iau broda .i brode
10:14 < zantufa> ([CU {co'e VAU}] [iau {CU <broda VAU>} {i <CU (¹brode VAU¹)>}])
10:14 < durka42> ue
10:14 < durka42> how do you escape from a {iau}??
10:14 < zipcpi> OK that scope is weird
10:14 < durka42> zantufa: tu'e co'e iau broda tu'u .i brode
10:14 < zantufa> ([tu'e {<CU (¹co'e VAU¹)> <iau (¹CU [broda VAU]¹)>} tu'u] [i {CU <brode VAU>}])
10:14 < zipcpi> There is no escape bu'a'a'a'a'a'a
10:14 < durka42> escape requires forethought
10:14 < durka42> hmm somehow profound :p
10:15 < zipcpi> lo kutydza cu klama lo kutyzda lo kutydza lo kutydza lo kutydza
10:16 < zipcpi> .y. zo kutyzda
10:17 < durka42> kurtyzda xu
10:18 < zipcpi> mi finti su'o valsi poi xo'o se cmene be'ei la kurtis
10:18 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/kutpoi
10:20 < zipcpi> finti mu'i no da mapti valsi lo si'o kunti co'e
10:20 < zipcpi> .y. mu'i lo nu
10:21 < zipcpi> aunai (to uedai zo'o toi) finti lo malma'o
10:23 < durka42> to .u'i
10:25 < zipcpi> da'i zo zai'e'oi zo zai'o'oi zo zai'e'u zo zai'a'a
10:34 < gleki> altatufa wont develop for several days because im basically rewriting the whole lojban grammar
10:37 < zipcpi> la kutydza cu cusku lo kutyuenzi jecu ciska lo kutlerpoi
10:40 < zipcpi> su nu cusku lo kutyuenzi ka'e nu smusku so'i da
10:41 < zipcpi> exp: su'o nu cusku lo kutyuenzi ka'e nu smusku so'i da
10:41 < mensi> ([{su'o BOI} {nu <CU (¹cusku [lo kutyuenzi KU] VAU¹)> KEI} KU] [CU {ka'e <nu (¹CU [smusku {so'i BOI} da] VAU¹) KEI>} VAU])
10:42 < gleki> spagetufa: kutyuenzi
10:42 < spagetufa> (CU [kuty/ŭènzi VAU])
10:42 < zipcpi> spagetufa: briii
10:42 < spagetufa> (CU [brìĭi VAU])
10:42 < durka42> zantufa: kutyuenzi
10:42 < zantufa> (CU [kutyuenzi VAU])
10:42 < durka42> ue
10:43 < zipcpi> uenmo ma .i xu la .guskant. pu smusku lo du gy na nelci lo'e zevlyjvo
10:43 < mensi> sei mi stace mi bi'u na mutce nelci
10:43 < gleki> ^correct usage of bi'u
10:44 < gleki> much better than ji'a here
10:44 < zipcpi> I dunno, to me bi'u means that {mi} is a new object; sort of like {ko'a bi'u}
10:45 < gleki> and this is where one can see that mi'unai can't go there
10:45 < gleki> {bi'u} means new information
10:45 < gleki> ~= what is new here is that it's me who broda
10:45 < zipcpi> Yeah but when it tags a sumti I believe that means that the sumti represents a new object
10:46 < zipcpi> Sort of like the difference between {lo bi'unai lorxu} and {lo bi'u lorxu}
10:46 < gleki> not object. the bject can be described zillions times before but situation in which it appears has him never described before
10:46 < zipcpi> Doesn't seem to match usage of {bi'unai} ga'a mi
10:47 < gleki>  ... in this ver situation
10:47 < gleki> *very
10:47 < gleki> jb: bi'u
10:47 < mensi> bi'u = bi'u [interjection] — newly introduced information, bi'u nai — previously introduced
10:47 < mensi> information
10:47 < mensi> :lo bi'u nai nixli pu klama lo panka i bi'u le nixli ca tavla lo nanla bu'u le panka — That girl (mentioned earlier),
10:47 < mensi> she went to a park. What is new is that she is talking to a boy there.
10:47 < mensi> :Related words: cnino
10:47 < gleki> another example but mensi's is better
10:47 < zipcpi> Yes, but here bi'u tags an entire sentence, so I have no problem. It's when it tags a sumti I worry about the semantics
10:48 < gleki> similar to {ui} tagging sentences
10:48 < gleki> and sumti
10:48 < gleki> what is colloquially called "emphasis".
10:48 < zipcpi> (lo bi'u nu) le nixli li'o...
10:48 < zipcpi> I don't have a problem there
10:48 < gleki> the situation is not new but that mensi appeared in it hasn't been mentioned earlier
10:48 < zipcpi> It's when you use {le bi'u nixli} to refer to a girl mentioned earlier, then I have a problem
10:49 < gleki> no, bi'u is new
10:50 < gleki> it's a bit similar to "NB" in that it introduces new entities, new facts, not just rephrases earlier facts.
10:50 < zipcpi> But that's the thing... to me there's no difference in what kind of thing {le bi'u nixli}, {ko'a bi'u}, and {mi bi'u} tags
10:51 < gleki> what is {le}?
10:51 < zipcpi> I dunno, you used it :p
10:53 < zipcpi> Hm... does make me wonder about how UI affects descriptions
10:53 < zipcpi> {lo nixli ku ji'a} != {lo ji'a nixli}?
10:53 < zipcpi> But what about {ko'abi'u} then
10:53 < durka42> that's supposed to be the same
10:54 < gleki> i used {le} anaphorically which isn't related to {bi'u}
10:54 < zipcpi> Then do we need {lo ke ji'a nixli} for "that which is also a girl"?
10:54 < gleki> that's = nixli ji'a
10:54 < zipcpi> Crap
10:55 < gleki> but not nixli ku ji'a
10:55 < zipcpi> lo poi'i ke'a ji'a nixli
10:55 < zipcpi> Yuck
10:55 < zipcpi> Well in CKTJ you'd save two syllables there :p
10:56 < gleki> zo'e noi ke'a ji'a nixli
10:56 < zipcpi> Not much better
10:56 < gleki> -1 syllable
10:57 < gleki> and -1 syllable in la alta dialect
10:57 < gleki> jia
10:57 < zipcpi> lo poi'i = 3 syllables, zo'e noi = 3 syllables
10:57 < gleki> lo poi'i = 4 syllables
10:57 < zipcpi> No
10:57 < gleki> [jh] ?
10:57 < zipcpi> Oh, by that count... I don't use that count
10:57 < gleki> [h] can happen only between vowels, not semivowels
10:58 < gleki> poh-eeh-heeh
10:58 < zipcpi> No... I consider /oi/ [oi], not [oj]
10:58 < zipcpi> But I don't know how I pronounce it
10:59 < latro`a> I think the official morphology agrees with zipcpi on this one
10:59 < latro`a> the diphthongs are actual diphthongs, except arguably for iV and uV
10:59 < zipcpi> k: poii'i
10:59 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
11:00 < zipcpi> Probably breaks to {po ii'i}
11:00 < zipcpi> But {ii'i} isn't a word, so...
11:00 < latro`a> no, I don't think so
11:00 < latro`a> *maybe* po i'i, though
11:00 < latro`a> but not ii'i
11:00 < zipcpi> k: lo broda poii ko'a
11:00 < mensi> ([LE:lo {G:broda <GOI:po UI:ii> KOhA:ko'a GEhU} KU] VAU)
11:00 < latro`a> unfortunately po i'i actually parses
11:00 < gleki> i dont understand, each vowel is one syllable
11:01 < latro`a> nope
11:01 < zipcpi> No, that's not how Lojban diphthongs work
11:01 < gleki> and it can't be [pojhi]
11:01 < gleki> [oi] is not a diphthong
11:01 < gleki> [oj] is.
11:01 < latro`a> but {oi} is a diphthong
11:01 < gleki> [poi] but [poihi]
11:01 < gleki> {.oi} is one syllable
11:01 < gleki> {poi} is one syllable
11:02 < latro`a> why is poi'i then three syllables?
11:02 < zipcpi> I dunno, if you want to see oi as VG instead of VV, I think VGC is allowed, even though CGV isn't
11:02 < zipcpi> I mean
11:02 < gleki> {poi'i} is three syllables because [poihi]
11:02 < zipcpi> Lujvo have VGC everywhere for crying out loud
11:02 < latro`a> do you mean lujvo or zi'evla
11:02 < latro`a> ?
11:02 < zipcpi> Both
11:02 < latro`a> what's a lujvo with that?
11:03 < zipcpi> vlaste: *aut*
11:03 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/%2Aaut%2A
11:03 < zipcpi> Er
11:03 < zipcpi> CVVCCV
11:03 < latro`a> ah, ok
11:03 < zipcpi> kaitcu
11:04 < latro`a> but it seems like reading it as VG is forcing a buffer vowel
11:04 < latro`a> in other words, you get po iy hi
11:04 < latro`a> for a suppressed {y}
11:04 < latro`a> rather than poi hi
11:05 < latro`a> which incidentally is how I think I say it
11:05 < latro`a> at any rate, if oi is not a diphthong then nothing is, no?
11:05 < latro`a> oh nvm you meant IPA
11:05 < latro`a> derp
11:06 < zipcpi> Not to mention
11:06 < zipcpi> k: atloiua
11:06 < mensi> (CU [Z:atloiua VAU])
11:06 < zipcpi> (Can't think of a real word with the pattern I want to demonstate)
11:06 < zipcpi> But notice the diphthong before the semivowel u
11:06 < zipcpi> spagetufa: atloiua
11:06 < spagetufa> (CU [.atlòiŭa VAU])
11:08 < zipcpi> Which is a different word from
11:08 < zipcpi> spagetufa: atloiiua
11:08 < spagetufa> (CU [.atloĭìŭa VAU])
11:08 < zipcpi> Same with
11:08 < zipcpi> spagetufa: atloiva
11:08 < spagetufa> (CU [.atlòiva VAU])
11:08 < zipcpi> spagetufa: atloiiva
11:08 < spagetufa> (CU [.atloĭìva VAU])
11:08 < zipcpi> All different words
11:08 < durka42> manabmi
11:09 < zipcpi> So pronouncing poi'i as po-ii-'i is just wrong
11:09 < durka42> jetnu
11:09 < zipcpi> Gleki asserted that poi'i is three syllables
11:09 < durka42> po ii'i is two words :)
11:09 < durka42> er no
11:09 < durka42> it's two
11:09 < gleki> poiki is two syllables, poi'i is three
11:10 < gleki> syllable is what vowel creates.
11:10 < gleki> semivowels dont count
11:10 < durka42> what are you talking about
11:10 < durka42> poi'i has no semivowels
11:10 < durka42> poi - 'i
11:10 < gleki> and thus it's three syllables
11:10 < durka42> if it has three syllables where are the syllable boundaries?
11:10 < gleki> im talking about conciseness of speech
11:10 < durka42> I think you're talking about misunderstanding of "syllable"
11:10 < gleki> you can sing vowels but cant sing semivowes and consonants
11:11 < durka42> but I'm not sure
11:11 < durka42> hence the question
11:11 < gleki> pooooooo     iiiiiiii    hiiiiiiiiiiiiii
11:11 < durka42> ah
11:11 < durka42> but {oi} is a diphthong
11:11 < durka42> so it combines into one syllable
11:11 < zipcpi> That's poii'i -> po ii'i
11:11 < gleki> ooooooooooooooooooooi
11:11 < durka42> yes
11:12 < durka42> diphthong
11:12 < durka42> .w diphthong
11:12 < gleki> {.oi} is [oj]
11:12 < zipcpi> pooooooi hiiiiii
11:12 < fenki> "A diphthong (/ˈdɪfθɒːŋ/ DIF-thong or /ˈdɪpθɒːŋ/ DIP-thong[1]|) (Greek: δίφθογγος, diphthongos, literally 'two sounds' or 'two tones'), also known as a gliding vowel, refers to two adjacent vowel sounds occurring within the same syllable." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diphthong
11:12 < zipcpi> If you want to think of oi as [oj], then yes, [jh] is allowed
11:12 < gleki> 11:12 < zipcpi> pooooooi hiiiiii <-- impossible. h can be only between vowels
11:12 < zipcpi> [hj] is not allowed, but [jh] is allowed
11:12 < durka42> "occurring within the same syllable"
11:13 < zipcpi> between one particular definition of vowels
11:13 < zipcpi> That considers diphthongs as VV, not VG
11:13 < durka42> a diphthong counts as a vowel for the purposes of ' being between two vowels
11:13 < durka42> if you want to think about it that way
11:15 < zipcpi> spagetufa: atloi'i
11:15 < spagetufa> (CU [.atlòi'i VAU])
11:15 < zipcpi> spagetufa: atloii'i
11:15 < spagetufa> (CU [.atloĭì'i VAU])
11:15 < zipcpi> Again, different words
11:16 < zipcpi> spagetufa: mau'ucmo
11:16 < spagetufa> (CU [mau'ùcmo VAU])
11:16 < zipcpi> spagetufa: mauu'ucmo
11:16 < spagetufa> ([FA ma] [CU {ŭu'ùcmo VAU}])
11:23 < zipcpi> Oh and about {le} and {bi'u}; you told me {le} can be exophorical too, which can be {bi'u} in certain contexts, at least IMO
11:25 < gleki> mensi: ko cnino
11:25 < gleki> exophora means context, i.e. what you have
11:26 < zipcpi> So {le bi'u nixli} = The girl that also exists in the context, but which is not anything mentioned earlier
11:26 < mensi> sei ca ca'o jai gau cnino be fai lo pe mi sorcu
11:26 < gleki> it can be mentioned earlier
11:26 < durka42> did we convince you about the syllables? :)
11:26 < gleki> no
11:27 < durka42> :(
11:27 < gleki> durka42: do you pronounce {poi'i} as [pojhi]?
11:27 < durka42> based on my nonexistent knowledge of IPA, yes
11:27 < zipcpi> I don't know whether I pronounce diphthongs as [oi] or [oj]
11:27 < zipcpi> But it's the same to me either way
11:27 < gleki> how can h be after a semivowel?
11:27 < durka42> ah j is a semivowel?
11:27 < durka42> all I know is that oi is a diphthong
11:28 < durka42> two vowels combined into one
11:28 < zipcpi> ca'e [jh] is allowed. It has to be if we don't want to break morphology yet again
11:28 < gleki> [j] is like "y" in "yes"
11:29 < gleki> so {.ie} is [je]
11:29 < durka42> oh then no
11:29 < durka42> oi is just oi
11:29 < durka42> why are we overthinking this :)
11:29 < gleki> {.oi} is [oj]
11:30  * durka42 looks up IPA diphthongs
11:30 < zipcpi> durka42: Good luck. I have no idea what's the difference between [oi] and [oj]
11:30 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/cirkotci.html
11:30 < gleki> see how {oi} is pronounced
11:30 < zipcpi> Other than something about semivowels that confuses Gleki
11:31 < durka42> this sound is what I use ({oi} as in "boy") http://cmed.faculty.ku.edu/ipafolder/vowels.html
11:31 < gleki> [oi] is aw-eeh
11:31 < gleki> [oj] is like in "boy", yes
11:31 < gleki> and [j] is a semivowel
11:31 < zipcpi> aw-eeh is [oji], at least according to Lojban morphology
11:31 < durka42> which is the same thing cirko is saying the video
11:31 < durka42> ok then {poi'i} is [pojhi]
11:32 < zipcpi> Like I said, ca'e [jh] is allowed if you insist on seeing /oi/ as [oj], cause that's the only way to not break morphology again
11:32 < gleki> [oi] is like in "Awe! East!"
11:32 < gleki> [oj] is like in "boy"
11:33 < zipcpi> I've never seen an IPA source that agrees with that
11:33 < durka42> the link I postd had a different IPA
11:33 < durka42> not one I can type though
11:33 < gleki> east is [iːst] in most dictionaries
11:33 < durka42> anyway I guess I agree with zipcpi then
11:34 < zipcpi> durka42: Same principle. That small-capital-i is a vowel, but it's considered one syllable
11:34 < durka42> uanai
11:34 < zipcpi> IPA considers two vowels put together a dipththong
11:34 < zipcpi> *diphthong
11:35 < durka42> well good that's what we need
11:35 < zipcpi> For something like "awe-east" it would be spelled [ɔ.i:st]
11:36 < zipcpi> Which is different from [ɔist]
11:36 < zipcpi> Or even [ɔ.ist]
11:36 < zipcpi> IPA . = old-Lojban ,
11:37 < gleki> http://lojban.github.io/cll/3/10/
11:37 < gleki> [i] or [i:], doesnt matter
11:39 < durka42> ...okay?
11:40 < zipcpi> [ɔist] != [ɔ.ist]
11:40 < durka42> true
11:40 < gleki> li'a
11:40 < durka42> in that the former is not transcribable into lojban :)
11:41 < gleki> because you put [.] in between
11:41 < zipcpi> IPA [.] is syllable break
11:41 < gleki> so in {poi'a} you pronounce {i} as [i] but in {poi} as [j]?
11:41 < zipcpi> I don't know how I pronounce it
11:42 < zipcpi> I don't think [ojhi] is impossible to pronounce
11:43 < zipcpi> It just doesn't fit with certain dogma about what Lojban considers vowels and where the apostrophe goes, but that's how it works
11:44 < zipcpi> Anything else would just break the morphology yet again
11:44 < zipcpi> And this time we won't have just zi'evla or cmevla to replace
11:44 < zipcpi> But cmavo and lujvo as well
11:45 < durka42> the CLL has nothing to say about this since it doesn't define any cmavo with >2 vowels
11:45 < durka42> but, pragmatically, it works fine
11:45 < durka42> so no need to break anything
11:45 < durka42> why can't {poi} be {poj}?
11:45 < durka42> er, [poj]
11:46 < zipcpi> Nor does it define zi'evla much beyond "What doesn't contain y and isn't a gismu, a lujvo, a tosmabru, or a slinku'i
11:46 < durka42> well that's what we have the modern morphology for
11:47  * zipcpi nods
11:50 < BenLubar> {mi vi'ecpe lo tafyvi'ujibri ku jo'u la jyfykys. jo'u la stalin.}
11:50 < BenLubar> how would I say the second sentence in http://i.imgur.com/fycHx.jpg ?
11:51 < zipcpi> - no'u la .jyfykys. jo'u la .stalin.
11:52 < BenLubar> thanks
11:55 < gleki> zipcpi: in JVS pls be careful with latex, especially such things as "10^30" which should be $10^{30}$
11:55 < zipcpi> Erm, I tried, but it broke
11:56 < gleki> this is what works and produces non broken pdf
11:56 < gleki> i corrected all your broken definitions
11:56 < zipcpi> Well, thanks. Before though I distinctly remembered getting an error
11:57 < zipcpi> When I tried to include those expressions as Latex
11:57 < gleki> mi di'a morji lo du'u mi tolcau ro jai sarcu be lo nu finti JVS poi cnino
12:01 < gleki> i xu ro da pu'i tcidu la'e ju'oi http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Proposal:_distinguishing_digits_from_numbers
12:01 < durka42> ua nu'o
12:01 < durka42> xu cnino
12:02 < gleki> li'a
12:02 < gleki> i kurtypapri
12:02 < durka42> whoa
12:02 < zipcpi> mi ja'a pu'i tcidu
12:02 < durka42> mi nu'o tcidu lo finti be K jenai clavelcki
12:02 < gleki> i xo'ei zei saske vau zo'oru'e
12:03 < zipcpi> saske lo si'o cusku lo kutyuenzi
12:04 < zipcpi> mutce lo ka za'e zenkai
12:05 < zipcpi> vlaste: zendo (fapro)
12:05 < vlaste> zo zendo gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo zendo gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
12:06 < zipcpi> zengoikai u'i
12:07 < zipcpi> sepi'o ra'oi -goi- noi selckikynomrafsi
12:15 < zipcpi> ra'oi -goi- galfi lo li'erla'i rafsi lo kulnu rafsi .i na vajni fa lo du le rafsi pu rafsi makau
12:18 < zipcpi> le kurtynompapri zo'u: I don't know. I can see the problem, but we definitely need a way for {xo'e} to represent several digits as well
12:19 < zipcpi> And uenaisai that he doesn't like xornunsei :p
12:24 < zipcpi> But ugh, I don't want *more* mekso grammar
12:25 < durka42> I was surprised at how few cmavo he introduced, .u'i
12:25 < zipcpi> u'i
12:25 < durka42> but yeah, I'm 100% sure those rules can be simplified
12:26 < zipcpi> Also his {xo'e'o'e}... I don't know how that would work. From what I can tell it's meant to be able to replace both BY and PA as needed
12:27 < zipcpi> But between the ci'i-ba'u proposals about what to do with BY and PA, I don't know how to make it work :p
12:27 < zipcpi> I can see it's utility, but I don't know how it would work
12:27 < zipcpi> *its
12:28 < zipcpi> Also I'd probably want it to be {xo'e'e}
12:30  * nuzba @Saffy: Watching language vids about learning multiple languages @MariiKusha frowns @ the Spanish & says 'thats not #lojban theyre talking it wrong' [http://bit.ly/1TUtYQS]
12:30 < zipcpi> I'd probably just use {bu'o'e} or even {zo'ebu} for "illegible/unknown symbol"
12:32 < durka42> zo'ebu :p
12:32 < durka42> compositionality ftw
12:32 < zipcpi> Yep
12:35 < bigcentaur> coi ro do
12:38 < durka42> coi
12:38 < durka42> mi zvati lo dotygu'e
12:42 < bigcentaur> .ue ma mukti la'e di'u
12:43 < durka42> skami cilre nunpe'i
12:49 < bigcentaur> .i xu plixau do
12:50 < durka42> go'i
12:53 < bigcentaur> .i xu do di'i zvati lo dotygu'e
12:56 < durka42> na go'i
12:56 < durka42> pu noroi
12:58  * nuzba @Saffy: Mr @alaric what is Musee/Musi/Mooosey or possibly Lucy in #lojban @MariiKusha thinks it's a farm animal but it's not the one she thought [http://bit.ly/1TUyIpE]
13:01 < zipcpi> I kinda wonder if the annoying vagueness that some gismu have is motivated by the desire to avoid metaphor in lujvo
13:01 < zipcpi> Like {kafke}
13:02 < zipcpi> It *could* have been just defined as "cough", yet allow lujvo built with it to mean different things like flatulence
13:02 < durka42> the gismu were intended to be quite broad
13:02 < durka42> and specificity achieved with lujvo
13:02 < zipcpi> Hm
13:06 < zipcpi> Hm the Champernowne's constant thing... that's what fancylojban is for. Define a new brivla, and either explain it with several examples if it's meant for human usage, or define it programatically if it's a technical document that leavs no stone unturned
13:24 < zipcpi> x1 is the Champernowne's constant in base x2
13:26 < zipcpi> The question is how do you define an infinite series? Maybe via infinite recursion
13:26 < zipcpi> Of course, that will make any computer program just get stuck :p
13:32 < zipcpi> How many downvotes will I get if I made {cmuna'u} "prime number"? :p
13:38 < zipcpi> x1 is a prime number -> bo'a mulna'u gi'e dubmau li pa .ije no da poi ke'a mulna'u gi'e dubmau li pa gi'e dubme'a bo'a zo'u: bo'a dilcymu'o da
13:39 < zipcpi> Maybe {dilcycmu}
13:51 < rlpowell> gleki: THe backup now only takes a couple of minutes; I don't think any further work is needed there.
14:10 < noncomcinse> selma'o: tau
14:11 < noncomcinse> mensi: selma'o: tau
14:11 < noncomcinse> jbo: tau
14:11 < zipcpi> LAU
14:11 < noncomcinse> jbo: dau
14:11 < noncomcinse> Oh, I thought that worked doi la zipcpi
14:11 < noncomcinse> .u'i zy na sampre
14:12 < zipcpi> u'i
14:12 < noncomcinse> What I really was looking for, ki'e la vlasisku, was PA2.
14:12 < noncomcinse> en: xexsi
14:13 < zipcpi> xexso
14:13 < zipcpi> 10^18
14:13 < zipcpi> "exa"
14:13 < noncomcinse> la mensi cu mrobi'o xu
14:13 < zipcpi> si'au go'i
14:13 < zipcpi> za'a na zvati
14:14 < zipcpi> ba'o oicli'a li'a
14:14 < noncomcinse> vlaste: xexso
14:14 < vlaste> xexso = x1 is 10^18 of x2 in dimension/aspect x3 (default is units).
14:14 < noncomcinse> vlaste: hexadecimal
14:14 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/hexadecimal
14:14 < noncomcinse> What's the base-N switch word?
14:14 < zipcpi> dau fei gai jau xei vai
14:14 < zipcpi> ju'u I think
14:15 < noncomcinse> vlaste: ju'u
14:15 < vlaste> ju'u = binary mathematical operator: number base; [a interpreted in the base b].
14:15 < noncomcinse> Is there a word for x1 is the color represented by RGB hex code x2?
14:16 < zipcpi> I don't think so...
14:17 < noncomcinse> ji'a cinri: HSV and CYM
14:17 < noncomcinse> vlaste: cyan
14:17 < vlaste> 3 results: cicna, cicnybla, cicnyri'o
14:17 < noncomcinse> vlaste: cicna
14:17 < vlaste> cicna = x1 is cyan/turquoise/greenish-blue [color adjective].
14:18 < zipcpi> Hmm... need words for "decimal" and "hexadecimal"
14:18 < zipcpi> ju'urdau , ju'urpaxa
14:18 < zipcpi> Dunno what the place structure should be though
14:19 < noncomcinse> x1 is the color represented by hex code x2 in system x3
14:20 < noncomcinse> cei broda
14:20 < zipcpi> skarnxunri'obla ?
14:21 < zipcpi> skarnju'upaxa ?
14:21 < noncomcinse> {lo tsani cu skari lo broda li rei gai no rei rei}
14:22 < noncomcinse> broda fi la xunre ce crino ce blanu
14:22 < zipcpi> #0EC0EE
14:23 < zipcpi> I don't know what goes in x3 though
14:23 < noncomcinse> I screwed it up, aimed for 7ec0ee
14:23 < noncomcinse> sa'ai li ze le'ai
14:24 < noncomcinse> http://www.color-hex.com/color/7ec0ee
14:24 < noncomcinse> .title
14:24 < fenki> [ #7ec0ee Color Hex Sky Blue 2 ]
14:24 < noncomcinse> the sky is colored by the color labeled with 7ec0ee
14:25 < noncomcinse> x3 would be la xunre ce crino ce blanu
14:26 < noncomcinse> Also, the selstidi valsi you said, mind explaining the rafsi/parts in them?
14:27 < zipcpi> xunri'obla -> xunre crino blanu
14:27 < zipcpi> ju'upaxa is just ju'u pa xa
14:28 < noncomcinse> zo ju'u se xi pajeno rafsi naku
14:28 < noncomcinse> s/no/re/
14:28 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: zo ju'u se xi pajere rafsi naku
14:28 < zipcpi> Yeah...
14:28 < noncomcinse> exp: se xi pajere rafsi
14:29 < noncomcinse> xu la .camxes. ji'a cu mrobi'o paunai
14:29 < zipcpi> se xi veipajere rafsi
14:29 < zipcpi> http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/camxes-exp.html
14:29 < noncomcinse> ki'e
14:29 < zipcpi> It was mensi that answers those queries
14:29 < noncomcinse> Ah.
14:30 < noncomcinse> lonu la mensi na .irci cu te nandu ma'a
14:30 < zipcpi> vei is funny lol
14:30 < durka42> coi la camxes
14:30 < camxes> coi
14:31 < noncomcinse> I'm getting sidetracked, but what would you think if there was a cmavo X that quoted like {sa} and terminated the most recently constructed construct?
14:31 < noncomcinse> Like {X lo} would ter-- Right.
14:31 < durka42> didn't zipcpi invent that yesterday or am I mixing people up
14:31 < noncomcinse> that was me .u'i
14:31 < durka42> whoops
14:31 < noncomcinse> I thought of it while thinking of {X .i}
14:32 < noncomcinse> Being able to terminate the most recent .i without starting a new one without doing {.i'au vau}
14:32 < zipcpi> Or just {mifyzilska}: x1 is a color represented by code x2 in system x3
14:33 < noncomcinse> Also, I've been thinking about a meta-delete-undo character.
14:33 < noncomcinse> For accidental {su}, mainly.
14:33 < ldlework> garrr, bach is so hard
14:34 < noncomcinse> Parser already has enough problems with delete words.
14:34 < durka42> that gets circular real fast
14:34 < noncomcinse> It doesn't cancel itself.
14:35 < noncomcinse> And can't be deleted by si
14:35 < noncomcinse> So it would have more magic than si sa su
14:36 < zipcpi> Or hey, I have {bitni} and {baitni}
14:36 < noncomcinse> .i mi klama si tavla -> .i mi /**klama si**/ tavla
14:36 < zipcpi> {cibybaitnyska} :p
14:37 < zipcpi> I forgot what the zi'evla for HTML was
14:37 < noncomcinse> .i mi sutra si X cadzu -> .i mi sutra /**si X**/ cadzu -> .i mi sutra cadzu
14:38 < noncomcinse> .i mi sutra si X X cadzu -> .i mi sutra /**si X**/ /**X**/ (second one is useless, not after a delete word) cadzu
14:38 < noncomcinse> ua pei
14:40 < selpahi> I think {xetmele}. Somehow it's not in the corpus.
14:40 < selpahi> But wtf is this: http://getanswerz-hugo.s3-website-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/lojban/2015/03/01/Would-it-not-be-good-to-post-it-to-the-main.html
14:41 < noncomcinse> vlaste: xetmele
14:41 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/xetmele
14:41 < durka42> wat
14:43 < selpahi> Is this relevant: http://selpahi.weebly.com/archive-pre-2014/systematic-color-fuivla
14:44 < zipcpi> Somewhat
14:44 < zipcpi> I dunno though. I think two zi'evla might be useful
14:44 < durka42> why use one zi'evla when you could use two?
14:45 < zipcpi> One primitive that's like x1 is the color with red level x2, green level x3, blue level x4
14:45 < selpahi> datru style
14:45 < zipcpi> With x2~x4 being 0-1, or subjective numbers
14:45 < zipcpi> Yep
14:45 < zipcpi> zo skatro zo'o
14:46 < zipcpi> Then another that's just the hexcode
14:47 < selpahi> Eventually I'll make words for "x1 is a color", and "x1 is the color red", "x1 is the color green" etc etc.
14:47 < zipcpi> There is already zilska, but hm
14:47 < selpahi> I can't have to run to Toaq Dzu everytime I want to talk about colors.
14:50 < selpahi> mi tolmo'i lo du'u mu'i ma kau mi pu zi co'a sazri lo skami
14:51 < zipcpi> No {sambau}?
14:53 < durka42> xu na ku lo nu tavla mi'o iau .u'i
14:53 < durka42> selpahi: ui nai la'a mi na klama la berlin
14:54 < selpahi> je'e
14:54 < durka42> xu do ba zvati la franfirt
14:54 < selpahi> .i .a'o la cirko ba jdice lo du'u xu kau ri klama la .franfurt.
14:56 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/skarxuciba
14:58 < durka42> selpahi: xu lo se jdice be do cu fancu lo se jdice be la cirko
14:58 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/skarxetmele
14:59 < durka42> zipcpi: ugh
14:59 < durka42> please pick one 0-1 or some other scale
14:59 < durka42> ambiguity between 0-1 or 0-255 is a neverending headache
14:59 < zipcpi> skarxuciba is a 0-1 scale
15:00 < durka42> that's not what you wrote in the notes
15:00 < zipcpi> "or subjective numbers"
15:00 < zipcpi> Like so'u / so'i
15:00 < selpahi> durka42: milxe lo ka fancu
15:00 < zipcpi> Which can stand for a 0-1 scale just fine
15:00 < durka42> zipcpi: ah. that wasn't clear to me from what you wrote
15:04 < selpahi> One of the points of {raunza} (apart from replacing banzuka) is to finally get a sort of RDA based off it. Before we would always use {banzu} as a seltau.
15:04 < selpahi> {raunzu} *
15:05 < durka42> vlaste: affix:rau
15:05 < vlaste> gradu = x1 [magnitude] is a unit/degree of/on scale/reference standard x2 (si'o) measuring property x3.
15:05 < durka42> xm
15:06 < durka42> I guess you don't see that as a problem :)
15:06 < zipcpi> I dunno, in my idiolect (which might not correspond with standard Lojban), {lo ka xunre} is a {zilska}
15:07 < selpahi> durka42: A sacrifice, maybe? :)
15:07  * zipcpi hides from the downvotes
15:07 < durka42> sacrifice is fine
15:08 < ldlework> selpahi: I made a website and used an article of yours as filler. If you mind, I can take it down.
15:08 < durka42> I wasn't sure if you were proposing to _replace_ -rau or just leave it with two selrafsi
15:08 < ldlework> http://banski.github.io
15:08 < selpahi> ldlework: I know. Maybe pick a better article :P
15:08 < ldlework> Beyond that, I'd love for any articles you'd like to submit to the site
15:09 < selpahi> Yeah, but I already have a blog, with comment section!
15:09 < durka42> I have a mental lojban blog todo list but also a rust one
15:09 < durka42> I'm not sure which one is higher priority :p
15:09 < ldlework> selpahi: Yeah I understand
15:09 < zipcpi> So {lo xunre} is "red", {lo ka xunre} is "the color red"... or I dunno
15:09 < ldlework> Might not make sense to port existing articles
15:09 < ldlework> lo ka xunre is a proposition
15:09 < zipcpi> If you don't like it you can make lujvo {kamxu'e} or something :p
15:09 < zipcpi> That's not how {ka} works
15:10 < ldlework> a very vague one
15:10 < selpahi> {lo xunre} is e.g. a red ball.
15:10 < ldlework> that's how all the abstractors work
15:10 < zipcpi> I meant "something red"
15:10 < zipcpi> I must be tired
15:10 < zipcpi> {lo xunre} is "something red"
15:11 < durka42> seems like {lo si'o xunre} would matmau but nobody seems to like {si'o} except me
15:11 < zipcpi> u'i
15:11 < zipcpi> Well cause I don't use {si'o} with a {ce'u}
15:11 < selpahi> I know some people disagree with this, but to me "the property of being a red object" is not the same as "the color red".
15:12 < ldlework> Especially when you consider that {lo ka da xunre de} doesn't seem anything like the same kind of thing as "the color red" or "redness"
15:12 < durka42> ieru'eju'ocu'i
15:12 < durka42> that's why I like {si'o}
15:12 < zipcpi> To me {si'o} is sort of like elliptical {ce'u} place, or just the idea of something being true
15:12 < ldlework> I mean it doesn't matter what abstractor is used
15:13 < ldlework> Each returns a thing which is a proposition
15:13 < selpahi> Yes, but to me {si'o} doesn't change anything here. "The concept of being a red object".
15:13 < selpahi> It's not the color red.
15:13 < ldlework> ie
15:14 < durka42> oh I see
15:14 < ldlework> "the color red" would be a singular reference "thing"
15:14 < ldlework> but the abstractors give you whole propositions
15:14 < zipcpi> Then just define {kamxu'e}. It's not like you care what -kam- means anyway :p
15:14 < durka42> lo selkai be lo'e xunre
15:16 < ldlework> I wonder though
15:16 < ldlework> is "red" the name for the property?
15:16 < ldlework> IE, in english, when we say "I love the color red" do we really mean "I love the property who's central proposition is 'red'"
15:16 < zipcpi> And that just reminded me that I defined my color-zi'evla somewhat ambiguously >.<
15:17 < ldlework> With the subtext, "And the things to which it applies"
15:17 < zipcpi> lo tsani cu skarxetmele zo'e ji cu skari lo skarxetmele be zo'e
15:17 < ldlework> I love the set of propositions for which the predicate is red.
15:18 < zipcpi> I dunno, I like the first one better somewhat, but if we're gonna be picky over the two, then we're gonna need even more brivla
15:19 < zipcpi> That's kinda why I abuse {ka}
15:19 < ldlework> I'm not even sure its abuse
15:20 < ldlework> I wonder if its just how lojban refers to properties
15:20 < ldlework> And instead of needing brivla to denote every possible proerpties
15:20 < ldlework> such as in other languages
15:20 < ldlework> we just generate those predicates on demand
15:20 < ldlework> like "red" as in the noun, is really just "lo ka xunre"
15:20 < ldlework> Its like "I love wet."
15:21 < ldlework> Well in English, there's just the trick were you don't have to add "ness" to "red" to talk about it
15:21 < ldlework> But really anywhere you see "I love the color red" can be expanded to "I love the property of redness."
15:21 < zipcpi> Hmm... I do see a potential problem though
15:21 < zipcpi> In that this clashes with the {lo ka} = {lo nu ckaji lo ka} polymorphism usage
15:22 < zipcpi> {lo nu vo'a ckaji lo ka}
15:22 < ldlework> Clashes how?
15:22 < zipcpi> mi nelci lo ka xunre
15:22 < zipcpi> Does that mean
15:22 < zipcpi> "I like the color red"
15:22 < zipcpi> Or
15:22 < zipcpi> "I like being red"
15:22 < zipcpi> ?
15:22 < ldlework> It means I love the events where something is charactized as having the property red
15:22 < durka42> exactly
15:23 < durka42> it depends on the brivla
15:23 < ldlework> Which is kind of like saying "I love the general proposition of "zo'e xunre zo'e zo'e zo'e zo'e"
15:23 < durka42> because some of them are defined to "apply" the ka
15:23 < durka42> it does clash
15:23 < ldlework> I don't understand
15:23 < durka42> where's that comic
15:24 < zipcpi> http://imgur.com/Uh7Nm44
15:24 < durka42> hmph you guys are terrible mind readers :p
15:24 < durka42> ue
15:26 < ldlework> Well its fine
15:26 < durka42> ldlework: like if you give a ka to djica, it fills in x1 to the ka's ce'u
15:26 < ldlework> just don't use the property
15:26 < ldlework> just use si'o or whatever
15:26 < durka42> if nelci does that, then {mi nelci lo ka xunre} means "I like being red"
15:26 < ldlework> "I love the propositions in which things are asserted to have redness about them"
15:26 < ldlework> mi nelci lo si'o xunre
15:26 < durka42> well yes that was my suggestion
15:26 < durka42> it didn't seem to be that well received :)
15:26 < selpahi> If you replace {ka} with {si'o} you lose all the {zo'e} and have them replaced by {ce'u}
15:26 < zipcpi> Well, my main objection to si'o is, does it take with ce'u?
15:26 < selpahi> It's not equivalent
15:26 < ldlework> Is that a problem?
15:26 < durka42> to me, {lo si'o xunre} is not just "the property of something being red"
15:27 < ldlework> I would say it is a very vague proposition
15:27 < zipcpi> selpahi: Now that's me'ei-si'o, which is yet another kettle of fish altogether T.T
15:27 < ldlework> And the only information encoded into it, is the predicate 'red' without any arguments
15:27 < zipcpi> No one seems to know what si'o means
15:27 < durka42> I highly doubt we're going to see selpa'i using {me'ei}!
15:28 < ldlework> Think of it like a pattern
15:28 < ldlework> It represents all possible propositions of that form
15:28 < selpahi> The predicate is "to be a red object", "red" alone is ambiguous and can deceive one's intuition here.
15:28 < ldlework> for example
15:28 < ldlework> mi pensi lo si'o do dunda
15:28 < zipcpi> Except that clashes with everything else
15:29 < ldlework> I'm thinking about the domain that contains all the other propositions where you give various things
15:29 < zipcpi> That's how I've been using si'o
15:29 < zipcpi> But it clashes with everything else
15:29 < ldlework> I don't know what you mean
15:29 < zipcpi> The big question is does si'o take one or more {ce'u}
15:30 < ldlework> ce'u is just like ke'a right?
15:30 < ldlework> its an externally bound variable?
15:30 < selpahi> All places are filled with {ce'u}, is the most common view.
15:30 < ldlework> ce'u bound to what though?
15:30 < selpahi> na'i
15:30 < ldlework> what does it mean for ce'u to appear unbound?
15:30 < durka42> yeah I don't really understand that view
15:30 < selpahi> There is no such thing as a bound ce'u
15:30 < durka42> like if you have a si'o that's chock full of ce'u
15:30 < ldlework> What
15:30 < durka42> and you pass it to a brivla that "applies"
15:30 < durka42> then what happens
15:31 < durka42> it explodes
15:31 < durka42> it seems like si'o is something different
15:31 < selpahi> si'o isn't really used with apply-selbri
15:31 < ldlework> Do you guys know the concept of "axiom schemas" ?
15:31 < zipcpi> If you have a si'o that's chock full of ce'u then there is no difference betwen {lo si'o vecnu} and {lo si'o te vecnu}, except for what place structure you get if you {me'au} it
15:31 < selpahi> Although Ilmen does use {si'o} like that now and then.
15:31 < ldlework> Anyone?
15:31 < selpahi> zipcpi: Yes.
15:32 < durka42> so you would say it's bad practice to give a {si'o} to any place such as djica2 or zukte2
15:32 < selpahi> Plus focus/emphasis considerations arguably
15:32 < durka42> ldlework: no
15:32 < selpahi> Yes, it's bad practice, because zukte2 is unary.
15:32 < ldlework> durka42: basically, in a formal system, the axiom schema is the "form" that theorems must take in order to be valid
15:33 < durka42> what if {si'o} were chock full of {zi'o}, instead of chock full of {ce'u}
15:33 < ldlework> Like you an say, statements must be of the form: xpxqx, where x is a string of hypens
15:33 < durka42> zu'u'u'ai
15:33 < selpahi> durka42: You mean zero ce'u? Then it still can't be applied
15:33 < ldlework> I'll try again later
15:33 < durka42> I mean lo si'o xunre => lo su'u zi'o xunre
15:33 < selpahi> I know.
15:33 < durka42> ldlework: sounds like a formal language
15:34 < selpahi> Wait, su'u?
15:34 < ldlework> durka42: so I suggest that si'o abstractions denote a sort of 'axiom schema'
15:34 < ldlework> They refer to the domain of matching propositions
15:34 < durka42> selpahi: well I didn't want to just repeat si'o, and I sure didn't want to say ka, so... :)
15:34 < ldlework> They don't get 'applied' as they are no functions persay
15:35 < durka42> I guess ka is safe since I removed all the places
15:35 < ldlework> they are function "prototypes"
15:35 < selpahi> A {ka} without {ce'u} doesn't exist, or is a {du'u}.
15:35 < durka42> I'm not all that interested in redefining a lojban concept in terms of some obscure english concept
15:35 < durka42> I'd rather know what it means in lojban :)
15:35 < ldlework> That's what I'm trying to illuminate but ok
15:35 < durka42> I agree they aren't functions
15:35 < durka42> and can't be applied
15:36 < durka42> that's why it seems strange to me to fill them up with ce'u
15:36 < ldlework> Its like a du'u with ambiguous places
15:36 < durka42> so fine, lo si'o xunre => lo du'u zi'o xunre
15:36 < ldlework> but instead of being a solid proposition
15:36 < ldlework> with simply, some places being unfilled
15:36 < ldlework> the unfilled places are like asterisks
15:36 < durka42> lo si'o klama => lo du'u zi'o zi'o zi'o zi'o zi'o klama
15:36 < ldlework> and it expands to all propositions of that form
15:36 < zipcpi> Maybe just redefine {za'i}. No one uses {za'i} :p
15:36 < selpahi> Is {zi'o xunre} easier to interpret for you than {ce'u xunre} ? :O
15:36 < durka42> I use za'i!
15:36 < durka42> it's about as easy to interpret as "the abstract property of redness" :/
15:37 < selpahi> of being a red object.
15:37 < durka42> but that's what you said you don't want
15:37 < durka42> we keep saying it shouldn't be about the objects
15:37 < selpahi> That's what xunre is
15:37 < durka42> so let's just remove that place!
15:37 < ldlework> I think the abstract property of redness, is a pattern that matches against the domain of possible concrete propositions
15:37 < durka42> I remain firm in my stance of refusing to fear zi'o
15:37 < ldlework> As is the property of drinking milk
15:37 < selpahi> No, xunre is inherently coupled to objects that have that color. I don't want any of that.
15:38 < ldlework> I agree you can't remove the places
15:38 < ldlework> It becomes a different predicate then
15:38 < durka42> but it sounds like we need a different predicate!
15:38 < durka42> since xunre is inherently coupled to objects, ti'e
15:38 < selpahi> Yes, new predicates please.
15:38 < zipcpi> But obviously we want it to be based on xunre
15:38 < durka42> zilxunre :)
15:38 < zipcpi> So what should it look like?
15:39 < selpahi> Don't make me throw up zo'o
15:39 < ldlework> lo si'o citka => lo du'u do citka, lo du'u do citka da, lo du'u do citka de, lo du'u mi citka, lo du'u mi citka da, lo du'u mi citka de, etc ad infinitum
15:39 < durka42> well, would this problem be solved if there were predicates meaning "redness", "blueness", etc and xunre/blanu/... were defined in terms of them instead
15:39 < durka42> 'cause we can do that :)
15:39 < zipcpi> Or we make a new NU
15:39 < selpahi> It would solve it while breaking half the corpus.
15:39 < zipcpi> But I won't know how to define it
15:39 < ldlework> the only things that would be valid for the predicate "is-redness" would be the property of redness
15:39 < durka42> selpahi: where did I suggest breakage?
15:40 < selpahi> Because {lo zdani cu xunre} stops being valid
15:40 < selpahi> Let me reread
15:40 < durka42> no I didn't say to redefine xunre
15:40 < durka42> I mean like the way Ilmen pulled {zilzena} out of thin air and redefined {zenba} based on it
15:40 < ldlework> a predicate that denotes redness itself, rather than things that have the property of redness
15:40 < selpahi> I agree
15:41 < ldlework> I argue you don't need it
15:41 < ldlework> the one thing for which that predicate would be true of, is the singular property of redness
15:41 < ldlework> and we have a way to generate a description to that thing, easily
15:41 < zipcpi> Ilmen's magic predicates ^^
15:42 < durka42> like if broda means redness, then xunre = skari lo broa
15:42 < ldlework> si'o is like a proposition query
15:42 < ldlework> it queries for all possible propositions of the same form
15:42 < selpahi> durka42: Yes, that's the idea.
15:42 < selpahi> Though I'd prefer if skari1 and skari2 were switched.
15:42 < ldlework> I'd say its the oppostie
15:43 < ldlework> redness = skari lo ka xunre
15:43 < ctefaho> all you need is to make 1 new gismu to solve that color mess
15:43  * selpahi won't make any gismu
15:43 < ctefaho> if you are talking about what I think you are this is easy to solve
15:43 < ldlework> Then we need words for wetness
15:43 < ldlework> and dryness
15:43 < ldlework> and happiness
15:43 < ldlework> and so on
15:43 < ldlework> this is the nice thing about lojban
15:43 < ldlework> you don't need adverbs, or adjectives
15:43 < ldlework> or nouns
15:44 < ldlework> just verbs
15:44 < zipcpi> That's why I wonder if we need a new NU
15:44 < durka42> what's wrong with si'o
15:44 < ctefaho> verbs still have to mean different things
15:44 < ldlework> its si'o!
15:44 < durka42> nobody uses it anyway, we can use it for this
15:44 < ctefaho> you can't just cram shit together like yall do right now
15:44 < zipcpi> Because everyone uses si'o differently T.T
15:44 < ldlework> ctefaho: xunre != ka xunre
15:44 < ctefaho> agreed
15:44 < durka42> making a new NU isn't the solution
15:44 < selpahi> From your last lines it looks like you are still not seeing the nuance between redness and red-object-ness
15:44 < ctefaho> or any broda = ke ce broda
15:45 < selpahi> Because dryness is not analogous to ka xunre
15:45 < durka42> indeed I do not see that nuance
15:45 < ctefaho> i take no part in your people's ka abuse
15:45 < ldlework> I'd say that aiming at the set of propositions that adheres to some propositional form is a very good mapping of the concept of concept
15:45 < zipcpi> durka42: Does si'o take a ce'u? Cause to me if it's gonna represent "redness", it should.
15:45 < ldlework> it duly serves si'o
15:45 < durka42> zipcpi: why? what would you do with it that requires a ce'u?
15:45 < ctefaho> and now I am gonna brb
15:45 < ctefaho> or bbiab, more likely
15:45 < zipcpi> To distinguish between {lo si'o vecnu} and {lo si'o te vecnu}
15:45 < durka42> another thing we could try is {lo'e ka}...
15:46 < zipcpi> Ahahahaha
15:46 < selpahi> That's so 2003.
15:46 < ldlework> I don't understand how lo si'o vecnu is not different than lo si'o te vecnu
15:46 < ldlework> Especially if you think of it interms of structure or schema
15:46 < durka42> it's only really different in emphasis
15:47 < ldlework> I would say that, attempting to fill the empty places of a si'o proposition is to misunderstand what si'o does
15:47 < ldlework> with anything, zo'e, ce'u, zi'o anything
15:47 < durka42> right? what's the difference between buying and selling anyway? both have a buyer and a seller...
15:47 < ldlework> We /want/ the proposition that doesn't fill places with anything
15:47 < durka42> I can get behind that maybe
15:47 < ldlework> As to select all the propositions that have the same form that fill it with different things
15:47 < ldlework> like
15:47 < ldlework> lo si'o citka lo ladru
15:48 < ldlework> this is the concept of drinking milk
15:48 < durka42> it's basically the concept of these places being able to be filled
15:48 < ldlework> you drinking milk
15:48 < ldlework> me drinking milk
15:48 < ldlework> no one drinking milk
15:48 < ldlework> etc
15:48 < zipcpi> "The color red is beautiful." "Buying is beautiful." "Selling is beautiful." ?
15:48 < ldlework> with all possible prepositions and tenses and so on
15:48 < zipcpi> I dunno, I admit I'm straining for examples here
15:48 < zipcpi> But I'm not good with them
15:48 < durka42> yeah. I don't see why color-concepts are so special tbh
15:48 < ldlework> I gave one
15:49 < ldlework> lo si'o xunre cu melbi
15:49 < ldlework> all the possible propositions involving something being red, is beautiful
15:49 < selpahi> ldlework: I don't think your interpretation is in conflict with usage.
15:49 < ldlework> the concept of red is beautiful
15:49 < zipcpi> I meant to explain why I'd want to distinguish {lo si'o vecnu} from {lo si'o te vecnu}
15:49 < ldlework> since si'o is never a function, it doesn't matter
15:49 < ldlework> since it never has variables applied in some order
15:50 < ldlework> it is a "mask" or "schema" to other possible concrete propositions
15:50 < ldlework> where as "lo du'u citka" is a proposition in which something is eating something, just unspecified
15:50 < ldlework> "lo si'o citka" is not
15:50 < selpahi> You can argue that buying is different from selling, but {te} shouldn't really be enough to convey that difference, since by definition {te} does nothing but rearrange places, not add meaning related to agency etc.
15:50 < zipcpi> I actually kinda like the {lo'e ka} idea, but others might not agree :p
15:51 < ldlework> Yea I think you'd use a lujvo for that
15:51 < durka42> zipcpi: yay :)
15:51 < ldlework> I dunno why my idea doesn't resonate zipcpi
15:51 < selpahi> ro bu'a zo'u pa da ka ce'u bu'a .i ja'o lu lo'e ka broda li'u lu lo ka broda li'u ma frica
15:52 < durka42> ro ckaji cu pamei xu
15:52 < selpahi> ro da pa mei
15:52 < ldlework> Also
15:52 < zipcpi> selpahi: Yeah that's the whole problem with defining {erve} or {vujnu} isn't it?
15:52 < ldlework> by referring to {lo si'o te vecnu} you explicitly refer to all the propositions where the buyer is emphasized
15:52 < selpahi> That's the motivation for {erve}.
15:52 < ldlework> I think it still works
15:52 < ldlework> Even though you denote all the propositions that have the same truth values of those that use {vecnu} instead
15:53 < zipcpi> Cause propositionally {erve} = {te vecnu} and {vujnu} = {se sumji}, but the agentive semantic and li'o li'o li'o
15:54 < ldlework> In fact, by referring to {lo si'o vecnu} you refer to *none* of the predicates that emphasize buying, and vice versa
15:54 < ldlework> none of the propositions*
15:54 < zipcpi> I understand why {erve} is created. I just don't know how to define it in Lojban other than through {te vecnu}
15:54 < ldlework> I would say the only possible alternative is bu'u
15:55 < ldlework> Like how do you define te vecnu beyond vecnu outside of emphasis?
15:55 < zipcpi> Hm
15:55 < ldlework> all the same referrent sets have the same exact truth values for propositions of either form
15:55 < ldlework> they _are_ the same proposition
15:55 < ldlework> conceptually
15:56 < ldlework> It seems strange to think that predicates in the abstract sense have order outside locution
15:56 < durka42> oh no... someone used the word "locution"
15:56 < durka42> time to go zo'o
15:57 < ldlework> Does anyone else like my model of si'o?
15:57 < ldlework> du'u then becomes easily explainable
15:57 < ldlework> instead of remaining as unfilled propositions
15:57 < ldlework> or "degenerate propositions"
15:57 < ldlework> they get filled with zo'es
15:58 < ldlework> to become concrete
15:58 < ldlework> and have truth
15:58 < ldlework> nu becomes temporally oriented du'u
15:58 < zipcpi> So {si'o} means "concept", so it's the abstract concept of all propositions that have that form?
15:58 < ldlework> zipcpi: yeah basically
15:58 < ldlework> ka becomes parametric nu
15:59 < zipcpi> So then empty places in si'o aren't exactly {zo'e} then... not sure what they are. Maybe the kurtyvla {mai'i}
16:00 < zipcpi> I know more about kurtyvla than any human has a right to; I need to wash my brain T.T :p
16:01 < durka42> en:mai'i
16:01 < durka42> vlaste: mai'i
16:01 < vlaste> mai'i = pro-sumti: the universal argument/value; syntactically-contextually and type-permitted maximally generic in its typing
16:01 < durka42> we need a kurtyvla for "mark next word as kurtyvla"
16:01 < zipcpi> {ci'ai}? :p
16:01 < selpahi> There are already two ci'ai
16:02 < zipcpi> Not in JVS
16:02 < selpahi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/ci%27ai
16:02 < selpahi> The other one was mine, but it was later added as mei'e
16:02 < zipcpi> Yeah I only see one
16:03 < ldlework> I mean you can easily just understand them as unfilled
16:03 < zipcpi> But see I proved my point. As soon as durka42 said that I immediately thought of the right kurtyvla
16:04 < selpahi> Why not {ce'u}
16:04 < ldlework> There's no inherent need to fill the places with an arbitrary thing. The grammar wouldn't require it.
16:04 < ldlework> The idea that they are degenerate incomplete proposition helps with the conceptualization as well
16:04 < ldlework> And the way in which they become du'u
16:05 < zipcpi> selpahi: Because if we fill all the places with {ce'u} then we can't use them for "the color red"
16:05 < ldlework> du'u should be the first truth-bearing level of abstraction
16:05 < zipcpi> Or "buying"-ness
16:05 < selpahi> Why not?
16:06 < zipcpi> Well xunre has only one place, but what of other predicats we might want to convert?
16:06 < selpahi> What of them?
16:06 < ldlework> selpahi: what's the functional motivator needing to fill them with a thing that wont/doesn't actualy do anything
16:06 < durka42> you were the one who said it doesn't work!
16:06 < ldlework> It doesn't change the structure, semantics or anything
16:06 < ldlework> It seems like an arbitrary requirement
16:07 < selpahi> The reason it doesn't work is not because of {ce'u}, but because of {xunre}. If you argue that it works, I wonder why you think {ce'u} can't fill the places for you
16:07 < ldlework> That the si'o places can be left unfilled, sort of justifies the way in which they suck in all possible values
16:07 < zipcpi> To me there's a big difference between any definition of {si'o} that would be useful, and {me'ei}
16:08 < ldlework> I don't even understand what the role of ce'u is in a non-function?
16:08 < durka42> well, it'd be nice if I didn't have to worry when I'm carrying around a si'o, that some brivla is going to come out of nowhere and shove sumti into the ce'us
16:08 < ldlework> I think I missed that, if it was explained above
16:08 < ldlework> okay so they can be filled
16:08 < ldlework> if they can be filled, it seems to break the utility of the thing
16:08 < ldlework> if they can't, they seem superflous and noisy
16:09 < zipcpi> But what I don't get is why we need new brivla that couldn't be algorithmically formed from {xunre}, because it is unsustainable otherwise
16:09 < selpahi> Lojban simply requires that there be something in each sumti place.
16:09 < zipcpi> It's not just colors
16:09 < ldlework> Since when?
16:09 < zipcpi> But "wetness", "dryness"
16:09 < selpahi> Since 1987
16:09 < zipcpi> anything-ness
16:09 < ldlework> selpahi: where is that described?
16:09 < ldlework> selpahi: also doesn't it seem arbitrary to you?
16:10 < zipcpi> So either use {si'o}, or some new NU
16:10 < ldlework> unframed from some prescription
16:10 < selpahi> I didn't make the language.
16:10 < ldlework> selpahi: sure I'm asking for your own reasoning
16:10 < selpahi> {zo'e} and {zi'o} exist because of this
16:10 < ldlework> But they do things that we don't want here
16:10 < ldlework> We certainly don't want to modify our predicates
16:10 < ldlework> And we don't want to denote anything in particular and just be silent about what is denoted.
16:11 < durka42> I think zi'o does exactly what we want, but what do I know
16:11 < ldlework> I'd say zi'o creates a new predicate
16:11 < zipcpi> durka42: What does a predicate with zero places mean? o.o
16:11 < ldlework> A predicate that is useful and standalone
16:11 < ldlework> IE, an entirely different distinct predicate
16:11 < durka42> a predicate stripped down to its essential concept and nothing more?
16:11 < selpahi> zipcpi: {lo ka ce'u broda} gives you "broda1-ness". As long as you have a suitable broda1 then you're good.
16:11 < ldlework> I'd say a predicate with no places is no predicate at all
16:11 < ldlework> It defies the very nature of predication
16:12 < durka42> selpahi: so what's the difference between redness and dryness
16:12 < durka42> ldlework: so does a predicate with unfilled places :)
16:12 < zipcpi> en: sudga
16:12 < zipcpi> vlaste: sudga
16:12 < ldlework> durka42: But si'o's are not predicates
16:12 < vlaste> sudga = x1 is dry of liquid x2; (adjective:) x1 is arid.
16:12 < ldlework> They're degenerate
16:12 < selpahi> Well, what I want is the color red.
16:12 < ldlework> err propositions
16:12 < ldlework> selpahi: malgli
16:13 < ldlework> "the color red" in English denotes a relation
16:13 < durka42> the color red ‽= redness
16:13 < ldlework> just like "dryness"
16:13 < ctefaho> you can't get the color red from just xunre
16:13 < ctefaho> you need something else
16:14 < ldlework> It depends on what it means to "get at a relation"
16:14 < ldlework> If you want to refer to a relation, that's pretty easy in lojban
16:14 < selpahi> ctefaho: You get me :P
16:14 < ldlework> If you want to refer to a relation without being forced to denote what is *being related* I argue you need si'o
16:14 < ctefaho> do reflect on the difference between having a color and being a color
16:14 < ctefaho> selpahi: I solved this ages ago
16:14 < ldlework> do reflect on the difference between being wet and being wetness
16:15 < durka42> O enlighten us then, dear ctefaho
16:15 < selpahi> ctefaho: Good for you. I did, too. But whenever I bring it up I am told to use si'o.
16:15 < ctefaho> none of you are going to like my solution
16:15 < ctefaho> except perhaps selpai
16:15 < durka42> wait, so is the color red the same as redness or not
16:15 < durka42> oh I misread the above
16:15 < ldlework> which part
16:16 < durka42> so apparently there are two people who have solutions, but they are both secret
16:16 < durka42> and all we are sure about is that {si'o} doesn't work, even though we can't explain why
16:16 < durka42> great!!
16:16 < ldlework> what
16:16 < ctefaho> I am going to give you a super-hint and just point out that your skari tries to do both a unary and a binary relation
16:16 < ldlework> Why doesn't si'o work?
16:16 < durka42> I don't know
16:16 < durka42> apparently it doesn't describe the color red
16:16 < durka42> because colors are more special than other properties for some reason
16:17 < durka42> why isn't there "the color dry"?
16:17 < ldlework> Yeah I think it is the case of English using one part of speech's form for another.
16:17 < ldlework> IE the definite reference to refer to a predicate
16:17 < selpahi> durka42: My solution is anything but a secret. I talk about it anytime colors come up. Like 20 minutes ago.
16:17 < durka42> okay, sorry
16:17 < ldlework> IE, in English, the predicates which ascribe color have been given proper names
16:17 < selpahi> Make a predicate for each color, and one for "x1 has color x2"
16:17 < durka42> I must have read too fast
16:17 < durka42> yeah, I'd get behind that solution
16:18 < durka42> I still don't see why colors are special though
16:18 < ldlework> But
16:18 < ldlework> What is true of that predicate?!
16:18 < zipcpi> But it's not sustainable. Case in point. I just made the words {skarxuciba} and {skarxetmele}
16:18 < ldlework> No there's a bigger reason why that's bad
16:18 < zipcpi> Are we gonna have abstract-color words for those too?
16:18 < ldlework> What is true of that red predicate?
16:18 < durka42> it's not sustainable if we need a new brivla for every {kambroda}
16:18 < ldlework> x1 is-red-itself
16:18 < ctefaho> ldlework: I am very interested in your take on ka and si'o, though
16:18 < ldlework> what is true of this predicate?
16:18 < selpahi> Juss that.
16:18 < ldlework> no
16:18 < ldlework> you know what I mean
16:19 < ldlework> what could ever logically be quantified and be true of this predicate
16:19 < durka42> seems like it can only be used as {lo broda}
16:19 < ldlework> other than a tautology
16:19 < ctefaho> Something being a color and something having a color is not the same thing
16:19 < durka42> nobody said it was
16:19 < ldlework> right I'm asking, what Thing is true of the predicate "is-red-itself"
16:19 < selpahi> The color red.
16:19 < durka42> it seems like there is only one such Thing, the same way selpa'i was saying earlier that there is only one {lo ka broda}
16:20 < ldlework> selpahi: so you realize you've limited your expansion of the predicate to a tautology
16:20 < durka42> but if we can't fill the place in lojban...
16:20 < ldlework> there is no way to refer to anything in the world, that is true of the predicate, other than using the predicate itself
16:20 < ldlework> In GEB, a very nice insight is made
16:20 < ldlework> That predicates are defined in terms of what other predicates, are true of the things that the predicate in question is true of.
16:21 < ldlework> Beyond the utilitarian existence of dictionaries that is
16:21 < ldlework> If you want to understand what a predicate means
16:21 < ldlework> You look at all the things that are true of that predicate
16:21 < ldlework> And the properties they share, IE, third-party predicates that are also true of that set
16:21 < ldlework> Defining red like this is utterly uselss.
16:21 < selpahi> lo [se] skari be ta cu *red.     lo *red cu melbi [se] skari
16:22 < ldlework> all you have is
16:22 < ldlework> lo *red cu *red
16:22 < ldlework> that's the best you can ever do
16:22 < ldlework> "Red" denotes a predicate, not a noun
16:22 < ldlework> You've been fooled.
16:22 < durka42> I'm not gonna go for hyperbole like "utterly useless"... but it does seem like a predicate with very limited application, and that language constructs are at least _supposed_ to cover
16:23 < durka42> it solves the one problem of referring to "the color red", but I don't know what that is anyway
16:23 < selpahi> The predicate is "to be the color red".
16:23 < selpahi> That's not a noun.
16:23 < durka42> or why we wouldn't end up needing a predicate for "the color dry"
16:23 < ldlework> selpahi: right but what you're doing is
16:23 < ldlework> making a predicate that attributes predicateness
16:23 < ldlework> because you have to expand "the color red" anytime it appears
16:23 < ldlework> even in your definitions
16:23 < ldlework> to a relational phrasing
16:24 < ldlework> because that's what it really means in the English, (and elsewhere I'd argue)
16:24 < ldlework> The predicate is "to be the predicate is red"
16:24 < ldlework> rednessness
16:24 < ldlework> Its like
16:24 < ldlework> "He left me in the lurch."
16:24 < ldlework> English abuses the definite reference for things that are not definite references all the time
16:25 < ctefaho> Red is red
16:25 < selpahi> This is a good time to stop the discussion.
16:25 < ctefaho> Redness is redness
16:25 < ldlework> If you replace red with wet, you'll see.
16:25 < ctefaho> Red is not redness
16:26 < ldlework> You haven't addressed the assertion that Red isn't really a definite reference in English
16:26 < ldlework> You keep repeating an arguement that is addressed by that assertion
16:26 < ctefaho> I know what red is and isn't in English
16:27 < ctefaho> also I am going to sleep
16:27 < ctefaho> ciao
16:28 < zipcpi> I don't know what it means to be red independent of {ko'a ckaji lo ka xunre}
16:28 < e`ogan> Welp all natlangs are guilty of that
16:28 < ldlework> en: skari
16:29 < e`ogan> Even Esperanto
16:29 < ldlework> ...
16:29 < zipcpi> I don't know what {skari} is good for other than being a specialized {ckaji} either.
16:29 < e`ogan> red is an approximation of a lot of colours
16:29 < ldlework> zipcpi: the bigger point I think is, notice that skari doesn't denote colors
16:29 < zipcpi> vlaste: skari
16:29 < ldlework> it ascribes colors to other things
16:29 < vlaste> skari = x1 is/appears to be of color/hue x2 as perceived/seen by x3 under conditions x4.
16:29 < ldlework> that implies that skari denotes properties
16:31  * nuzba @masterq_mogumog: 後置か中置で述語を適用するのか。すごい聞いてる方が脳味噌がこんがらかりそう。。。と思うのは今の自然言語に慣れた脳味噌だからなんだろうか。 #ロジバン #述語論理 [http://bit.ly/1GIfiuY]
16:32 < durka42> selpahi: thanks for discussion. need to think more
16:33 < durka42> also need to sleep
16:37 < zipcpi> I also don't know how "Red is a beautiful color" is different from {lo'e xunre cu melbi} lol
16:38 < selpahi> Because it means "Red things are beautiful".
16:38 < selpahi> The first sentence makes no claims about any objects at all.
16:39 < selpahi> And it shouldn't, either
16:39 < zipcpi> Except you consider the "color red" an object
16:39 < zipcpi> Otherwise nothing can go into x1 of this new predicate
16:39 < selpahi> Imagine you like the color red, but happen to hate all things that are red. The two are not really related.
16:40 < selpahi> I like the color blue, but I hate all my blue toys, because they are old and broken.
16:40 < selpahi> Not "nothing", but any color that qualifies as red.
16:40 < selpahi> What's the problem with that...
16:40 < zipcpi> But it's like durka42 said, I don't see how "extracting" a color from "objects that are a color" is different from "extracting"  dryness from "objects that are dry"
16:41 < zipcpi> I meant 'object' in terms of {sumdai}
16:41 < zipcpi> Or {sumdza}... whatever
16:42 < selpahi> Or {pavmei}
16:42 < zipcpi> lo mu'oi gy the color red gy : lo xunre = ??? : lo sudga
16:45 < zipcpi> This is the problem I'm referring to... what is the relation described here?
16:45 < zipcpi> And if we need new brivla to solve this problem for colors, why don't we need brivla for everything else?
16:46 < ldlework> If you like the color blue but hate all your toys, nothing is in violation because its not the toys that you like as an entail of liking blue, its liking _that_ your toys are blue that is an entailment of liking blue
16:47 < selpahi> I don't care that they are blue.
16:48 < selpahi> Their color has nothing to do with me disliking them, nor with me liking the color they happen to have.
16:48 < selpahi> Objects are *irrelevant* to the color.
16:49 < ldlework> I was trying to also exhibit that the quality of the toys is divorced from your liking of blue/blueness
16:52 < durka42> not exactly irrelevant
16:52 < durka42> since they satisfy the property of having that color
16:52 < ldlework> Basically my problem with your solution is that it entail creating N predicates which are special in that they entail no other conjunctive relations to any other predicates.
16:53 < ldlework> Or rather, conceptually, such conjunctive relations are impossible
16:55 < ldlework> Its a strange form of raising. To create predicates, which are only true of an individual single other predicate (isxunre is only true of xunre).
16:56 < ldlework> We have a grammar for creating such nonce predicates which are true of specific predicates
16:57 < ldlework> Its like wanting water.
16:57 < ldlework> You want something to do with the water.
16:58 < ldlework> You can't like red.
17:00 < zipcpi> srana fa lo dotygu'e sei me'oi http://www.itchyfeetcomic.com/2013/11/second-mother-tongue.html#.VbF_sPmqpBc
17:02 < ldlework> I think one of the interesting thing about Lojban is that it proves that all there is is predicates
17:02 < ldlework> Any noun you can create in any language is really just the presupposition of a true attribution of some predicate
17:03 < ldlework> This is why there is no such existential referent for the predicate is-the-color-red beyond the property, or predicate relation of some other thing exhibiting redness.
17:05 < durka42> co'o
17:06 < e`ogan> I wonder if there could be devised an artificial colour system naming that would allow to describe pretty much all colours accurately with just a few names...
17:06 < e`ogan> After all we have luminosity of colours too
17:07 < zipcpi> I just made {skarxuciba} and {skarxetmele} lol
17:07 < zipcpi> Which theoretically can describe any color in RGB space
17:07 < zipcpi> But...
17:09 < e`ogan> YCbCr would be the best way to describe colours
17:09 < zipcpi> I don't know how to define that
17:09 < e`ogan> Basically it is an xyz 3D definition of colour
17:10 < ldlework> Even if you wanted to talk about "The wavelength of red" there is no such thing as "a wavelength", its a property too.
17:10 < e`ogan> where xy are the colours and Z (named Y) is the luminosity
17:10 < ldlework> e`ogan: are you into color theory?
17:11 < e`ogan> I'd go one step further and add another dimension
17:13 < ldlework> e`ogan: you might really enjoy, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAoljeRJ3lU
17:13 < e`ogan> Basically have a colour wheel that is extruded into a cylinder where a degree° describes colour, the Z axis value describes the luminosity, and the distance from the center of the wheel describes the degree of reflection
17:14 < deltab> sounds like HSL, except I don't know what you mean by reflection
17:14 < deltab> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSL_and_HSV
17:14 < e`ogan> CMYK-RGB-mirror
17:15 < e`ogan> Basically CMYK is the format of colours that bounce off the ambient light, RGB is the colour of the light emitter
17:16 < e`ogan> Basically with same three numbers (255;255;255) you could describe more parameters than Y Cb Cr
17:17 < zipcpi> skarxuciba, skarcinupe, skar... dunno
17:17 < zipcpi> skarje'ike skarjejbujcru
17:17 < zipcpi> ... darnit
17:18 < e`ogan> by making colour a degree of a colour wheel I'd have a distance from the center and the Z axis as another two parameters
17:18 < zipcpi> skarpantone
17:18 < ldlework> Oh there is one predicate true of color predicates, in that they are true of the predicate 'is-a-color'
17:19 < zipcpi> Basically the problem here is what goes into skari2
17:19 < ldlework> So basically, creating predicates for color predicates would allow you to avoid using abstractions in the cases where the predicate {skami} appears
17:19 < ldlework> oops skari
17:19 < ldlework> I think that would be the less lojbanic thing to do
17:19 < ldlework> I think we should be proud of lojban and use lo NU xunre to refer to redness, just as we would if we were talking about wetness
17:20 < ldlework> But that argument seems baseless since there's nothing inherently wrong with creating predicates to refer to predicates
17:20 < ldlework> just seems like a slippery slope
17:20 < ldlework> but maybe colors are just naturally suited to being specially denoted
17:21 < ldlework> I'm not really sure tbh, I think its a reasonable debate
17:22 < ldlework> "more words" probably wins out
17:25 < e`ogan> I'd vote for less words that can domore when combined
17:25 < e`ogan> do more*
17:26 < ldlework> "There is almost universal consensus, however, on the idea that only properties can be predicated and exemplified. For example, ordinary objects like apples and chairs cannot be predicated of, and are not exemplified by, anything."
17:27 < ldlework> Since things other than redness itself can "be red", this sort of reinforces the idea that the kind of thing that Red is, is a property.
17:27 < ldlework> If we're to objectify it, my making a predicate that denotes it, surely, that predicate denotes the predicate "is-red"
17:28 < e`ogan> I agree
17:28 < e`ogan> red is not an object on itself
17:29 < ldlework> e`ogan: or rather, in english, the noun-phrase "a red", or "that red" denotes a property not an object (beyond the sense in which properties /are/ objects)
17:30 < e`ogan> I am sure we could get to the basic root of it: predicates are things we perceive and objects are more the things that are true regardless of our perception of them
17:31 < ldlework> well, more plainly, predicates ascribe properties, and objects are the things they ascribe them to.
17:31 < ldlework> Its a matter beyond perception
17:31 < e`ogan> Chair is a chair for everyone: it is a contraption to have a seat; while the colour, softness, comfort are the things we perceive about the said chair
17:32 < ldlework> I agree, but I think that's orthogonal to what kind of thing "the color red" is
17:32 < e`ogan> Well language relates strongly to perception, so i don't think it can really deal in absolute terms
17:33 < ldlework> But what red is, isn't a matter of who sees it.
17:33 < ldlework> No more than what "wet" is.
17:33 < e`ogan> Yes "the red" is a bit of a misnomer
17:33 < ldlework> Exactly.
17:34 < e`ogan> Welp i'd disagree: we'd perceive both wet and red differently because we have different number of receptors for them and we taught ourselves to perceive things in our own unique ways
17:34 < ldlework> It has nothing to do with whether statemetns are truth, or isomorphic with the world
17:34 < ldlework> Its a more primitive matter
17:35 < ldlework> Its a question of what part of speech "red" really is.
17:36 < ldlework> Color names in general.
17:36 < ldlework> If you had a predicate that meant, "exudes-redness" you could point to a firetruck and say that it is true of this predicate.
17:37 < ldlework> If you had a predicate that meant, "is-literally-redness-itself" what could you point to and say that it is true of?
17:37 < ldlework> Even in the abstract
17:37 < ldlework> It is basically only true of itself, and of its determinable, "color"
17:38 < ldlework> (on determinates and determinables, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinate-determinables/)
17:40 < ldlework> In otherwords, if this "is-literally-redness-itself" predicate was {broda} the only way to tell me what {broda}'s is by saying {lo broda cu broda}
17:40 < ldlework> Because there would be no other predicate that you could use to refer to whatever we're referring to in this sentence.
17:41 < ldlework> And the only other substantial statement you could make before going into the utterly abstract is
17:41 < ldlework> {lo broda cu se skari}
17:41 < ldlework> But that's it
17:42 < ldlework> You could of course make other non-entailing statemetns like {mi nelci lo broda} and so on but we'd never be able to learn anything about what a {lo broda} is from statements such as those
17:42 < e`ogan> I see the issue now
17:42 < e`ogan> For all intents and purposes in lojban red needs to be a predicate
17:43 < ldlework> right and we have a perfectly awesome way to refer to predicates
17:43 < ldlework> a whole family of ways, called NU
17:44 < ldlework> Like I said before, there's nothing inherently invalid about creating a predicate which refers to some other predicate. Not really. But it seems exclusionary and malgli.
17:45 < ldlework> And I think the whole business about which NU you should use to say something like "I like Red." is a non-sequitur
17:45 < ldlework> Any NU you use, will be technically correct, but will have different senses just like always
17:45 < ldlework> mi nelci lo ka xunre = I like my redness
17:46 < ldlework> mi nelci lo nu xunre = I like when things are red
17:46 < ldlework> mi nelci lo du'u xunre = I like that things (whatever they are) are red
17:46 < ldlework> mi nelci lo si'o xunre = I like redness
17:48 < ldlework> The du'u one can also be interpreted "I like that there exists the potential for redness and non-redness."
17:49 < ldlework> Since the du'u may contain a zo'e which points to "no da" or "su'o da" which implicates the posibilities of both redness and non-redness
17:49 < ldlework> Or even just a hidden negation of xunre itself.
17:49 < zipcpi> I'm not sure du'u works that way
17:49 < ldlework> du'u encodes propositions
17:50 < ldlework> everything I said, is an entailment of what propositions are
17:50 < zipcpi> Yes but it then has a truth value; how can it represent both X and na X?
17:50 < ldlework> the du'u here is vague
17:50 < ldlework> it represents any possible tense, or set of arguments, prepositional tags, and so on
17:50 < zipcpi> No, du'u is what goes into the x1 of jetnu or jitfa
17:50 < ldlework> until I whittle that space down by providing more explicit things in the du'u construction
17:51 < ldlework> right...?
17:51 < ldlework> or djuno, or jinvi
17:51 < ldlework> and so on
17:51 < zipcpi> But {ja'a} is the default
17:51 < ldlework> So?
17:51 < zipcpi> So how can you say that {lo du'u xunre} can represent {lo du'u na xunre}?
17:52 < ldlework> That a predicate exists and therefore can be used in propositional construction implies the possibility of the predication of descriptions
17:52 < ldlework> It doesn't imply anything about the world...
17:52 < ldlework> That anything actually does or does broda or xunre or whatever..
17:52 < ldlework> a possible interpretation of {lo du'u xunre} is {lo du'u na xunre} and {lo du'u pu xunre} and {lo du'u le mamta be do cu xunre} and so on
17:53 < zipcpi> I don't think so
17:53 < zipcpi> Where does the {na} come from if {ja'a} is the default?
17:53 < ldlework> It really is. The ja'a is merely a default of pragmatics
17:53 < zipcpi> There's a reason I invented {cau'a}
17:53 < ldlework> Its the default illocutionary force in speech, but not grammatical construction
17:54 < ldlework> Its mechanical observation that things unspecified in a du'u are unspecified.
17:55 < ldlework> How you are to be taken in the case of unspecified speech is a different question all together.
17:56 < ldlework> Anyway, supposing that logical affirmation is "built-into" lojban propositions, unlike tense, or other parts of speech, the points still remain.
17:56 < ldlework> If I was an inference engine
17:57 < ldlework> From the mere apperance of the statement {lo du'u broda} I can infer the possibility of {lo du'u na broda}
17:57 < ldlework> That's all I mean
17:58 < ldlework> Not that the statement means, or should be interpreted as the negation, but that the conceptual boundries of what is possible is expanded both ways by the existence of a predicate.
17:58 < ldlework> Hope that makes it more clear
17:59 < zipcpi> Hm
17:59 < ldlework> Just as the statement {lo du'u na broda} suggests a conceptual potentiality of {lo du'u broda}
18:00 < ldlework> If one thing isn't broda'ing, it makes sense, logically, that other things might broda.
18:00 < zipcpi> I'm not sure... what about {lo du'u li re sumji li pa li pa}?
18:00 < ldlework> Even if it turns out that nothing broda's real or imagined.
18:00 < ldlework> Is there a predicate there?
18:00 < zipcpi> {sumji}?
18:01 < ldlework> you don't need to close the li?
18:01 < ldlework> oh dur
18:01 < ldlework> Sure, I don't see why this doesn't also imply the existence of the statement {lo du'u li re na sumji li pa li pa}
18:02 < ldlework> Which could be true under a different interpretation of mathematics or simply exist as a false statement.
18:02 < zipcpi> Hm
18:02 < ldlework> But it allows for other true statements with other arguments.
18:02  * zipcpi nods
18:02 < ldlework> Even if it didn't..
18:04 < ldlework> The nice thing about formal systems is being able to derive new statements typographically
18:08 < e`ogan> I found an interesting combo of english words: [footage a rest ore] or [foot age are store]
18:09 < e`ogan> spaces, they matter all too much in english
18:09 < zipcpi> Technically spaces are phonemic in Lojban writing too, unless you mark stress
18:09 < zipcpi> LOjbo bau vs lo JBObau
18:10 < zipcpi> But if you mark stress, scriptum-continuum is possible
18:10 < zipcpi> Oh yeah and mandatory pauses
18:17 < zipcpi> More pertinent though is phonetic word-boundary ambiguity, like "propagate" vs "prop a gate" :p
18:27 < dmiles_afk> in coding an infenerce engine negation (actualyl MOdus Tolens logic) is alwasy the funnest
18:29 < dmiles_afk> languages that purposely remove the concept of negation by logic (such as RDF) end up becoming unusable to a logicain
18:30 < dmiles_afk> all i am saying is negation *must* be said to invert quantifiers and even nescisty/possibility
18:31 < zipcpi> That can be achieved by fronting {na}
18:31 < dmiles_afk> (regardless of the speakers intent to recognise their logic as modal)
18:32 < dmiles_afk> (regardless of the speakers intent to not recognise their logic as modal)
18:57 < deltab> e`ogan: foot a gear e-store
18:58 < e`ogan> Indeed XD
20:00 < noncomcinse> coi .irci prenu noi jbobau ki
20:17 < bigcentaur> ki ki'a
20:18 < noncomcinse> .i tcekitaujau
20:18 < noncomcinse> .i zo ki zo ke'a simxu loka ce ce binxo
20:19 < noncomcinse> .i zo ce zo ce'u go
20:19 < noncomcinse> si go'i
20:19 < noncomcinse> ua pei
20:20 < noncomcinse> do'oi bigcentaur
20:21 < bigcentaur> uanai
20:21 < noncomcinse> ce ki tau jau dialect
20:22 < bigcentaur> i'm passing some of your sentences through camxes, but they're not parsing
20:22 < noncomcinse> It swaps the following pairs of words: ce/ce'u ki/ke'a tau/tu'a
20:22 < bigcentaur> what does?
20:22 < noncomcinse> Hang on.
20:24 < noncomcinse> tcekitaujau
20:24 < noncomcinse> Forgot to copy the link.
20:24 < noncomcinse> bigcentaur: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ce_ki_tau_jau
20:26 < noncomcinse> vlaste: jo'u
20:26 < vlaste> jo'u = non-logical connective: in common with; along with (unmixed).
20:27 < noncomcinse> camxes: jo'au tcekitaujau loka ce ce klama
20:27 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "k" found.
20:28 < noncomcinse> camxes: +exp jo'au tcekitaujau loka ce ce klama
20:28 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "k" found.
20:28 < noncomcinse> Man, and I thought English dialects were hard.
20:32 < noncomcinse> bigcentaur: Once you get used to saying {djuno lodu} instead of {djuno lodu'u}, you don't want to go back.
20:48 < bigcentaur> i'll take whatever camxes says is legal
20:48 < noncomcinse> bigcentaur: so just swap ce/ce'u du/du'u ki/ke'a
20:49 < noncomcinse> 22:00:26 <noncomcinse> coi .irci prenu noi jbobau ki -> coi .irci prenu noi jbobau ke'a
20:50 < bigcentaur> don't get me wrong, i'm all for having the most useful cmavo being as short as they can
20:51 < noncomcinse> I strongly disagree with su/su'o swap tho
20:51 < noncomcinse> Because it breaks an IAU patter
20:51 < noncomcinse> zi za zu si sa su etc
22:33  * nuzba @hinoki__: 寝起きで口が回らない場合や、思い出し思い出し言葉を選ぶときについ言葉尻が伸びてしまうとき、あらぬ誤解が無くなる。lojban言語(logになってた:P) https://twitter.com/hinoki__/status/624451320397737985 [http://bit.ly/1VDA8H6]
23:27 < gleki> ugly
23:27 < gleki> fegli
23:27 < gleki> i cant edit russian definitions
23:27 < gleki> looks like the only way is not to use jvs
23:27 < gleki> oh, si, sa,su
23:28 < gleki> i wonder how we can can {sa} powerful but not make the grammar swell
23:31 < gleki> en:coi
23:39 < zipcpi> Maybe what things like "the color red" or "dryness (in general)" is really something like {si'o} + {ka}
23:40 < zipcpi> "x1 is the concept of the property shared by all things that fit this description; ce'u binds to the subject of description"
23:40 < gleki> i dont understand ur color problems at all
23:40 < zipcpi> Or of course there is also {lo'e}; but... hah try convincing selpahi to use {lo'e}
23:41 < zipcpi> I don't fully understand it either
23:41 < zipcpi> But what do you use?
23:41 < gleki> xunre1 is any red object, yes. read Uqbar, it can cover half of the universe, this xunre1
23:41 < zipcpi> OK. Then what goes in skari2?
23:42 < gleki> either {lo xunre} or {lo ka xunre} or {lo su'u'u'u'u'u xunre} depending on what decide in bpfk
23:42 < zipcpi> lol
23:42 < gleki> *what you
23:43 < gleki> but i'd suggest {lo xunre} because Zipf
23:43 < zipcpi> What *I* decide? Won't that be the BSFK then? :p
23:43 < gleki> or bsfk
23:43 < gleki> so many committees
23:43 < zipcpi> lol
23:43 < gleki> i need to create "Academy of Lojban" then
23:44 < gleki> http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Academy_de_Lojban
23:45 < zipcpi> Hmm... how about "I see the color red" when there is actually nothing with the color red. Maybe you're hallucinating
23:45 < zipcpi> And know you're hallucinating
23:46 < zipcpi> Maybe it's really {se xunre} lol
23:46 < gleki> it's about external predicate
23:46 < gleki> something like {menlyganse}
23:46 < gleki> lujvo: menlyganse
23:47 < gleki> lujvo: menli ganse
23:47 < mensi> menga'e[6387], menganse[7937], menlyga'e[8517], menlyganse[10067]
23:47 < gleki> i need to fix this lujvo tool
23:48 < zipcpi> Or maybe something that's just "the sensation of"... don't think {li'i} works though
23:48 < zipcpi> "the sensation of red"
23:48 < zipcpi> "the sensation of dryness"
23:49 < gleki> no, not li'i,  a new brivla is needed
23:49 < zipcpi> And maybe a new NU
23:49 < gleki> "x1 mentally perceives x2 as if x1 used sensation x3 for real"
23:50 < gleki> lujvo will work here
23:50 < gleki> since it's not a borrowed concept
23:50 < gleki> btw, what is the term for purely apriori words like {kreivi}?
23:50 < gleki> not jbofuvi
23:51 < gleki> zi'evla as opposed to fu'ivla
23:51 < gleki> but zi'evla is a bit misused
23:51 < zipcpi> Hm we might need a word for "a priori"
23:51 < gleki> *but {zi'evla} is a bit misused
23:51 < gleki> en: jbofuvi
23:51 < mensi> jbofuvi = x1 is a Lojban-derived zi'evla with meaning x2 derived from word(s) x3 | From lojbo + fu'ivla, shortening of
23:51 < mensi> jbojbofu'ivla. See zi'evla. Examples of jbofuvi: crenzuue, gentufa, aiste, and of course, jbofuvi itself. |
23:51 < mensi> spheniscine
23:51 < gleki> en: mu'umgu
23:51 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
23:51 < gleki> jbo;' mu'umgu
23:51 < gleki> jbo: mu'umgu
23:51 < mensi> mu'umgu = x1 finti x2 lo nu x3 tcaci x4 | lo'e se mu'umgu cu valsi .i lo'e mu'umgu cu krici lo du'u lo da'i nu lo se
23:51 < mensi> mu'umgu cu zasti cu zmadu lo da'i nu lo se mu'umgu cu na'e zasti kei lo ka lo noi lo mu'umgu cu djica ke'a ku'o nu lo te
23:51 < mensi> mu'umgu cu tcaci lo ve mu'umgu cu lakne ce'u .i zo mu'umgu cu se'o sezysarxe se mu'umgu la .telselkik. lo nu mu'umgu kei
23:52 < mensi> loi jbopre .i ra'oi -mug- rafsi ca'e zo mu'umgu | selckiku
23:52 < zipcpi> Is that it?
23:52 < gleki> no
23:52 < zipcpi> Right
23:52 < gleki> x1 is a zi'evla that has the only etymology in Lojbanist's head
23:52 < zipcpi> lol
23:52 < gleki> zo'onai
23:53 < gleki> lo jbofuvi have etymology in other lojban words
23:53 < gleki> fu'ivla have etymology in borrowed words
23:53 < gleki> gismu mostly too
23:53 < gleki> lujvo are like jbofuvi
23:54 < gleki> but what is {kreivi}?
23:55 < gleki> i failed to find anything like that in any natlangs so i used my imagination or maybe arbitrary letter generator in my head and here it is
23:55 < zipcpi> lol
23:55 < zipcpi> Like I wonder how selckiku makes his words too
23:57 < gleki> en: etymlo
23:57 < gleki> en: etymol
23:57 < gleki> mensi, search!
23:58 < gleki> dont die
23:58 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
23:58 < mensi> 6 da se tolcri: vlakra, farka, pamniarkovni, u'imla, u'ivla, zgibite
23:58 < gleki> camxes: pamniakovni
23:58 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "p" found.
23:58 < zipcpi> Maybe it's related to {ca'engau} or {autca} :p
23:58 < gleki> camxes: pamniarkovni
23:58 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "p" found.
23:59 < gleki> that's basically it. mukti said he wouldnt fix JVS
--- Day changed Fri Jul 24 2015
00:00 < gleki> why do we even need JVS. CLL says Lojban is complete :P
00:00 < zipcpi> lol
00:01 < gleki> why not call {kreivi} words blalalavla?
00:01 < zipcpi> lol
00:01 < gleki> any other suggestions?
00:01 <@Broca> Lojban _is_ complete, just poorly documented! (If we are to believe the 2002 baseline statement ...)
00:09 < zipcpi> $x_1$ valsi gi'e se finti fo lo poi'i se djuno le finti be $x_1$ ku po'o
00:10 < zipcpi> $x_1$ valsi gi'e se finti fo lo narju'odza be lo na'e finti be $x_1$
00:12 < gleki> mensi: doi akmnl xu do nitcu lo fukpi be lo JVS datni sorcu i mi ka'e benji fi do i ma mrilu judri
00:12 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.akmnl.gy. di'a cusku da
00:20 < zipcpi> Hm that little discussion about {ganai/ko} makes me wonder if {du'u} is in fact the most natural type for minde3
00:21 < gleki> those nu/du'u rants ...
00:21 < zipcpi> lol
00:22 < zipcpi> Or just koinde3
00:23 < zipcpi> koinde is a word made to cover all the illocutionary "imperative" modes without implying "order one to do something"
00:23 < zipcpi> But could also cover "weaker" imperative modes
00:23 < gleki> koinde != minde
00:23  * zipcpi nods
00:23 < gleki> but as for e'inde im not sure
00:34 < zipcpi> Hm {joi'i} might be the only VUhU I'd use... and I'd use it more like JOI than VUhU o.o
00:35 < zipcpi> ke zo ko'oi jonai zo e'i ke'e jo'i ...
00:35 < zipcpi> *joi'i
00:42 < zipcpi> Huh, {poi'i} could actually be at least one possible solution to the {gau/gi'e} problem
00:42 < zipcpi> la djan poi'i gau ke'a lo broda cu brode kei gi'e brodi
00:43 < zipcpi> Hm... might not be very economic with the syllables though
00:43 < zipcpi> Not even with CKTJ
00:54 < gleki> *cu
00:55 < zipcpi> Oh right
00:55 < zipcpi> exp: la djan cu poi'i gau ke'a lo broda cu brode kei gi'e brodi
00:55 < mensi> ([la djan KU] [cu {poi'i <(¹[gau ke'a] [lo broda KU]¹) (¹cu [brode VAU]¹)> kei} VAU] [gi'e {CU <brodi VAU>} VAU])
00:59 < zipcpi> lo kutydza cu vlakra :p
01:00 < zipcpi> I don't even know what {kutydza} actually means. It means whatever NULL means lol
01:02 < zipcpi> I'm pretty sure {nu} is from {fasnu}
01:03 < zipcpi> And I don't think it needs to be restricted to being a Lojban word, it's like {fu'ivla}
01:03 < zipcpi> {jbofuvi} is restricted to being a Lojban word, because it's definition depends on that of {zi'evla}
01:07 < zahlman> en: kutydza
01:07 < mensi> kutydza [< kunti da ≈ Empty X] = x1 is the null value/argument | See kunti, goilka'i, narju'odza, kutpoi, kutselcmi,
01:07 < mensi> kutlerpoi, kutyuenzi, zai'o | spheniscine
01:18 < zipcpi> Oh, I was talking about {blalalavla} btw
01:23 < gleki> NULL like in "the value hasn't been assigned yet"?
01:24 < zipcpi> Maybe. But you can also assign something *to* NULL
01:26 < zipcpi> I think, like NULL, it doesn't actually mean anything other than something to compare itself with
01:26 < zipcpi> lo kutydza cu kutydza
01:26 < zipcpi> lo na'e kutydza na kutydza
01:26 < gleki> okay, its default unassigned value but you are free to assign it back to it
01:28 < zipcpi> So {lo kutydza} = NULL. {cu kutydza} = isNull()
01:28  * zipcpi shrugs
01:29 < gleki> oh you just discovered nouns and verbs in programming languages :D
01:29 < zipcpi> Haha
01:38 < gleki> strange that you needed so many new words to emulate proglangs. ilmen ba'anairu'e reused existing words mostly
01:38 < gleki> but if you do create new words for proglangs then we need to start using them outside programming
01:38 < zipcpi> faubganke and ganfauke have use outside programming
01:38 < zipcpi> And goilka'i can be useful for instructional texts
01:39 < zipcpi> "Let X be the amount of mana paid here"
01:39 < zipcpi> Or something
01:39 < zipcpi> Ilmen used the nonce word {zvailu}, which I formalized as {ganfauke}
01:40 < zipcpi> {goilka'i} was invented to fill a shortcoming with using {goi} to assign variables
01:41 < zipcpi> And the kunti-stuff is invented because Lojban doesn't really have a way to not put anything into a {ce}/{ce'o} construct
01:42 < zipcpi> Xalbo used the kurtyvla {zai'o} at my suggestion, but the problem is its type is unspecified
01:42 < zipcpi> Wonder if we need an empty mass too. Not sure how a mass is used in programming
01:43 < zipcpi> But since Lojban has that type, it might as well exist
01:43 < zipcpi> loi no co'e
01:44 < zipcpi> Hm if zero is a problematic number for {ce}/{ce'o} constructs to have, one is problematic as well
01:45 < zipcpi> {ko'a ce zi'o}? {zi'o ce zi'o}?
01:46 < zipcpi> Same goes for {joi}
01:51 < gleki> how to specify type?
01:52 < zipcpi> I'm not sure what Curtis intends with {zai'o} Maybe {zai'o poi porsi} or {zai'o poi setmima} or something
01:56 < zipcpi> There's also {tu'o} but that's a PA
01:59 < gleki> i thought tu'o is {zi'o} http://mw.lojban.org/index.php?title=ELG._Context
01:59 < zipcpi> It's also why I added a section for "informal algorithms" to the fancylojban challenges page
01:59 < zipcpi> Yes, but what does {zi'o ce zi'o} mean?
01:59 < zipcpi> Can that be used for the empty set?
01:59 < gleki> i dont think so
02:00 < zipcpi> Yeah...
02:00 < gleki> zi'o ce zi'o cu simxu lo ka ce'u ce'u tavla lo bergu lo jbobau
02:00 < zipcpi> I think I might actually have to talk to Curtis about zai'o
02:00 < gleki> it means "Bergu is discussed in Lojban" but there can't be anyone to discuss it between each other.
02:01 < zipcpi> Whether zai'o can be used to mean {lo kutpoi ja kutselcmi ja co'e li'o}
02:01 < gleki> so it's a new predicate, and that's what zi'o is fort
02:01 < gleki> *for
02:01 < zipcpi> Or whether he intends it to be used like {zai'o ce zai'o} = {lo kutselcmi}
02:02 < zipcpi> Then it can be also used for sets with only one member
02:02 < zipcpi> {li pa ce zai'o}
02:05 < zipcpi> Hm I see you've already talked to him
02:05 < zipcpi> But I'm not sure then, that {zai'o} can be used the way I want it
02:05 < zipcpi> Ugh I think we might need a new cmavo
02:05 < zipcpi> {tu'oi} or something
02:05 < gleki> en: incita
02:05 < mensi> incita = x1 (text) is an adposition expressing relation x2 (property of nonce place, has places for ce'u referring to
02:05 < mensi> members of x3) and connecting members of the set x3 (ordered group of text) | The first member of x3 is what follows
02:05 < mensi> after the adposition (unless co is used) and is usually called 'complement' or 'argument'. The second member of x3 can
02:05 < mensi> sometimes be called 'noun phrase of adposition'; it can e.g. be the current clause (lo bridi), x1 of it, x2 of it etc.
02:05 < mensi> x3 doesn't need to represent the full specification, only the first member can be specified. To specify both members
02:05 < mensi> ce'o can be used. See also bridi, sumti, sumtcita | gleki
02:05 < gleki> i start talking like Curtis
02:05 < zipcpi> lol
02:06 < zipcpi> lo kurtyvla poi se finti la gleki
02:06 < gleki> si'au
02:08 < gleki> lu sepi'o li'u incita lo ka se te se pilno vau lu lo forca li'u ce'o lu lo ka citka li'u
02:08 < gleki> i mi citka sepi'o lo forca
02:10 < gleki> i va'i lu lo forca li'u cu te incita fi lu sepi'o li'u
02:11 < gleki> i na djuno lo jei jai se kufra
02:11 < zipcpi> exp: la djan joi ko'a
02:11 < mensi> ([{la djan KU} {joi ko'a}] VAU)
02:12 < gleki> exp: pa mlatu cu mo
02:12 < mensi> ([{pa BOI} mlatu KU] [cu {mo VAU}])
02:12 < gleki> KU!
02:12 < gleki> mensi: gadri
02:12 < mensi> lo [PA] broda = zo'e noi ke'a broda [gi'e zilkancu li PA lo broda]
02:12 < mensi> la [PA] broda = zo'e noi lu [PA] broda li'u cmene ke'a mi
02:12 < mensi> lo PA sumti = lo PA me sumti
02:12 < mensi> la PA sumti = zo'e noi lu PA sumti li'u cmene ke'a mi
02:12 < mensi> loi [PA] broda = lo gunma be lo [PA] broda
02:12 < mensi> lai [PA] broda = lo gunma be la [PA] broda
02:12 < mensi> loi PA sumti = lo gunma be lo PA sumti
02:12 < mensi> lai PA sumti = lo gunma be la PA sumti
02:12 < mensi> lo'i [PA] broda = lo selcmi be lo [PA] broda
02:12 < mensi> la'i [PA] broda = lo selcmi be la [PA] broda
02:12 < mensi> lo'i PA sumti = lo selcmi be lo PA sumti
02:12 < mensi> la'i PA sumti = lo selcmi be la PA sumti
02:12 < mensi> PA sumti = PA da poi ke'a me sumti
02:12 < mensi> PA broda = PA da poi broda
02:12 < mensi> piPA sumti = lo piPA si'e be pa me sumti
02:12 < gleki> pa broda = pa da poi broda
02:12 < gleki> izo ku mo
02:13 < zipcpi> mo'u finti lo kurtyvla fa'o http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/tu'oi
02:14 < gleki> xm i lu lo broda li'u simsa lu pa broda li'u lo ka se stura
02:14 < gleki> i i'a
02:14 < zipcpi> ba'asai la .kurtis. ba ma'udzau
02:34 < zipcpi> vlaste: setmi (fapro)
02:34 < vlaste> zo setmi gimkamsmikezypro no catni gismu .i zo setmi gimkamsmikezypro no cipra gismu
02:36 < zipcpi> Problem with zi'evla with shapes like {setmima} is that you can't elide the last vowel when making zevlyjvo
02:37 < zipcpi> VCCV is also iffy, due to high possibility of clashes
02:37 < akmnlrse> gleki: ja'a nitcu se ju djica
02:37 < mensi> akmnlrse: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: xu do nitcu lo fukpi be lo JVS datni sorcu i mi ka'e benji fi do i ma mrilu judri |
02:37 < mensi> 2015-07-24T07:12:13.405Z
02:38 < zipcpi> coi nandyselbacru
02:38 < akmnlrse> coi bauspo
02:38 < zipcpi> u'i
02:38 < akmnlrse> spagetufa: akmnlrse
02:38 < spagetufa> (CU [.àkmynlyrse VAU])
02:39 < zipcpi> ua
02:39 < zipcpi> la spagetufa cu tisnyga lo zunsna slaka me'o ybu
02:40 < akmnlrse> ka'e ku su'o se bangu zo'u lo zunsnaslaka cu bacru jai filmau .i ku'i lo tisna tarmi zo'u frili fa lo ka djuno lo du'u ma kau noi lerfu cu pagbu ma kau noi slaka
02:41 < zipcpi> ie
02:47 < akmnlrse> tersmus: ro da poi ke'a su'o de viska cu se kanla su'o di
02:47 < tersmus> FA x1:(EX x2. viska(_,x2)). EX x2. kanla(x2,x1)
02:51 < akmnlrse> zantufa: ge ti gi'i
02:51 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [oO] .onai [uU] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
02:53 < akmnlrse> gerna: ko'a e ko'e e ke ko'i e ko'o
02:53 < mensi> (0[{<ko'a e ko'e> e <ke (1ko'i e ko'o)1 KE'E>} VAU])0
02:56 < akmnlrse> exp: getigitajetu
02:56 < mensi> ([{ge ti gi ta} {je tu}] VAU)
02:56 < akmnlrse> alta: getigitajetu
02:56 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <ge ti gi (¹ta [je tu]¹)>} CU {COhE VAU}])
02:57 < akmnlrse> zantufa: getigitajetu
02:57 < zantufa> ([ge ti {gi <ta (¹je tu¹)>} GIhI] VAU)
02:57 < akmnlrse> gerna: getigita etu
02:57 < mensi> (0[{<ge ti gi ta> e tu} VAU])0
03:01 < akmnlrse> gerna: getigita ebotu
03:01 < mensi> (0[{<ge ti gi ta> <e bo> tu} VAU])0
03:06 < gleki> la altatufa xi stodi de'a farvi
03:07 < akmnlrse> gerna gu'e mo gi nei je bo go'i
03:07 < akmnlrse> gerna: gu'e mo gi nei je bo go'i
03:07 < mensi> (0[{<gu'e mo gi nei> <je bo> go'i} VAU])0
03:11 < zipcpi> exp: broda xi brode
03:11 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
03:14 < gleki> na'u
03:19 < gleki> i ke ji'a la altatufa nu'o kaken tu'a lu mo xi mo li'u
03:19 < gleki> *kakne
03:29 < zipcpi> xy'y simsa lo te finti be zo ke'oi bei mi
03:30 < noncomcinse> ki'a
03:30 < zipcpi> en: ke'oi
03:30 < mensi> ke'oi = [KE] reverses modification order of contained tanru (does not affect lujvo). | Marks a "selskiski"/"
03:30 < mensi> military-style"/"noun-adjective" tanru, i.e. tertau come *before* seltau. This differs from co in that it does not
03:30 < mensi> affect the place structure of the sumti to the right; i.e. in mi ke'oi broda brode do (= mi brode broda do), both mi and
03:30 < mensi> do are arguments of broda. Default grouping is still left: lo ke'oi ckule nixli cmalu melbi resolves to lo ke'oi
03:30 < mensi> (((ckule nixli) cmalu) melbi), which is equivalent to lo melbi ke cmalu ke nixli ckule. co does not (re-)reverse the
03:30 < mensi> order of tanru-modification; it only changes place structure. See ke'e'u. | spheniscine
03:30 < noncomcinse> zo xy'y
03:30 < zipcpi> en: xy'y
03:30 < mensi> xy'y = [UI1b] naturalistic interjection: in thought/contemplation | Differs from y in that it doesn't imply hesitation
03:30 < mensi> or a desire to say anything after. The first syllable may be lengthened as desired. Has a mandatory pause after. See
03:30 < mensi> pensi. | spheniscine
03:31 < noncomcinse> simsa zo .xm. (noi ku'i cmevla)
03:31 < zipcpi> ie
03:32 < noncomcinse> lu sa'ei .xm. li'u drata .i .u'u .i .a'i toi'e .ai
03:32 < noncomcinse> .i ke'oi prenu bangu logji ke fa lo logji bangu prenu xu
03:33 < zipcpi> ke'oi prenu ke bangu logji
03:33 < zipcpi> Still left-groups
03:34 < zipcpi> Only order of operation is reversed
03:35 < zipcpi> Nor does it change the meaning of {ke} or {ke'e}
03:35 < zipcpi> I'll probably need to finish my page sometime
03:36 < zipcpi> Basically translating that pages about tanru in CLL
03:36 < zipcpi> into selskiski form
03:36 < gleki> exp: ca tu'e mi mo i mo tu'u
03:36 < mensi> (ca tu'e [{mi <CU (¹mo VAU¹)>} {i <CU (¹mo VAU¹)>}] tu'u)
03:36 < gleki> exp: caku tu'e mi mo i mo tu'u
03:36 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "u" found.
03:37 < gleki> exp: fa tu'e mi mo i mo tu'u
03:37 < mensi> (fa tu'e [{mi <CU (¹mo VAU¹)>} {i <CU (¹mo VAU¹)>}] tu'u)
03:37 < gleki> O_0
03:38 < noncomcinse> zipcpi: I can't put three seltau in ke'oi?
03:38 < zipcpi> You can
03:39 < zipcpi> Erm, what exactly do you mean? Give me a skiselski tanru and I'll try to translate it
03:39 < noncomcinse> I did logji bangu prenu
03:39 < zipcpi> Which is ((logji bangu) prenu)
03:39 < zipcpi> Reversed, it's ke'oi (prenu ke( logji bangu))
03:39 < zipcpi> Er
03:40 < zipcpi> s/logji bangu/bangu logji
03:40 < fenki> zipcpi meant to say: Reversed, it's ke'oi (prenu ke( bangu logji))
03:40 < gleki> tokipona invertor
03:40 < zipcpi> Ahaha
03:40 < zipcpi> My inspiration was Malay and Latin though
03:41 < noncomcinse> Why isn't ke'oi prenu bangu logji ke valid?
03:41 < zipcpi> Heck, the name {selskiski} comes from a Malay idiom/mnemonic for that rule
03:41 < zipcpi> ke'oi is selma'o KE
03:42 < zipcpi> exp: ke prenu bangu logji ke
03:42 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "e" found.
03:42 < zipcpi> alta: ke prenu bangu logji ke
03:42 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected ['h] or ['hiI] but end of input found.
03:42 < noncomcinse> whut
03:43 < noncomcinse> off: ke prenu bangu logji ke'e
03:43 < mensi> ([ke {prenu bangu logji} ke'e] VAU)
03:43 < akmnlrse> spagetufa: ke prenu bangu logji
03:43 < spagetufa> (CU [{ke <(¹prènu bàngu¹) lògji> KE'E} VAU])
03:43 < noncomcinse> I meant {ke'oi prenu bangu logji ke'e}
03:43 < zipcpi> And all that'll do is close {ke'oi}, which is automatic anyway
03:44 < zipcpi> It won't make it right-group
03:44 < noncomcinse> But why were you using {ke logji bangu}?
03:44 < noncomcinse> Can't we have everything under ke
03:44 < akmnlrse> ke'oi prenu bangu bo logji
03:44 < noncomcinse> s/ke/ke right group?/
03:44 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: Can't we have everything under ke right group?
03:44 < noncomcinse> s/ke/ke'oi/
03:44 < fenki> noncomcinse meant to say: Can't we have everything under ke'oi right group?
03:44 < zipcpi> If we want right grouping there are already a bunch of cmavo for that
03:45 < zipcpi> en: ke'ai
03:45 < mensi> ke'ai = [KEhAI] Toggles to no grouping | rafsi -ked- The grouping of gismu/rafsi is left ambiguous. So with a statement
03:45 < mensi> like: ke'ai melbi cmalu nixli ckule   or   kedmlecmaxlicu'e it is unclear whether this is referring to a (((pretty
03:45 < mensi> little)girls)school), (pretty(little(girls(school))), etc. Overridden by ke'ei or ke'ei'a. (Applies only to next selbri.
03:45 < mensi> ) | ues
03:45 < zipcpi> Oops, not that one
03:45 < zipcpi> en: ke'ei
03:45 < mensi> ke'ei = [KEhEI] Toggles to right grouping of tanru/lujvo. | rafsi -keb- "ke'ei'a" toggles back to left grouping.
03:45 < mensi> (Applies only to next selbri.) | ues
03:46 < zipcpi> I don't know how these selma'o work though
03:48 < zipcpi> {ke'oi} is not meant to be "just reverse the words", but a whole new paradigm of making tanru. For example, under ke'oi {co} only changes place structure, not the ordering (though right now parsers don't treat KE and CO the way I want ke'oi to work)
03:48 < noncomcinse> en: xk
03:48 < mensi> 32 da se tolcri: banxe'ixu, banbuxuku, bangaxuku, bankuxuku, banmuxuku, bansuxuku, banxuku'a, banxukubu, banxukucu,
03:48 < mensi> banxukudu, banxuku'e, banxukufu, banxukugu, banxuku'i, banxukuje, banxukuju, banxukuke, banxukuku, banxukulu, banxukunu,
03:48 < mensi> banxuku'o, banxukupu, banxukuru, banxukusu, banxukutu, banxuku'u, banxukuve, banxukuvu, banxukuxe, banxukuxu, banxukuzu,
03:48 < mensi> banxuxuku
03:48 < noncomcinse> ...
03:48 < noncomcinse> en: xo'i
03:48 < mensi> xo'i = [XOhI] Extracts selbri from a tag, inverse of fi'o | xo'i bau is equivalent to bangu, xo'i fi'o broda is
03:48 < mensi> equivalent to broda | selpahi
03:48 < noncomcinse> exp: ma xo'i na
03:48 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "a" found.
03:49 < noncomcinse> exp: ma xo'i bai
03:49 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,], [mM], [nN], [rR] or [vV] but "b" found.
03:49 < noncomcinse> exp: ma xo'i fi'o zukte
03:49 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "z" found.
03:52 < zipcpi> Left grouping is easier because if we want to force left grouping if right grouping is default, lots of forethought is needed
03:53 < zipcpi> da'i lu ke'oi ke ke ckule nixli ke'e cmalu ke'e melbi
03:53 < zipcpi> li'u
03:53 < zipcpi> This is why {ke'oi} doesn't change grouping to right
03:54 < zipcpi> Or {bo} can be used I suppose, but still
03:55 < noncomcinse> ke'oi is like co but in forethought and without spitting the tail?
03:55 < zipcpi> Yep
03:59 < noncomcinse> Okay, now I see its use. uanaibu'onai
04:00 < zipcpi> And then there is {ke'e'u}, which semi-permanently changes all tanru to selskiski
04:00 < zipcpi> ke'e'unai changes it back
04:01 < zipcpi> It's basically meant to be a "what-if" experiment
04:01 < zipcpi> Given some discussions with... e'ogan I think?  about why Lojban chose skiselski over selskiski
04:02 < zipcpi> (hint, I suspect malgli reasons, although I do have one issue with selskiski that I haven't quite solved satisfactorily yet, namely what to do with {be})
04:03 < noncomcinse> selsmi
04:03 < noncomcinse> selskiski?
04:03 < gleki> {xo'i} isnt supported by any parser
04:03 < zipcpi> lo ke'oi bangu logji be ko'a
04:03 < noncomcinse> .oi cmalu batkyfoi
04:04 < zipcpi> selskiski is what I call the "reversed" tanru
04:04 < zipcpi> selski = "thing described", a metaphor for the tertau
04:04 < zipcpi> skicu = "describer", a metaphor for the seltau
04:06 < zipcpi> gleki: Hm yeah that's annoying. Just put it in GOhOI and call it a day
04:06 < zipcpi> Hm I wonder if zantufa implemented GOhOI
04:06 < gleki> exp: go'oi mo
04:06 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
04:06 < zipcpi> zantufa: zantufa ze'oi fa
04:06 < zantufa> (CU [zantufa {ze'oi fa}] VAU)
04:06 < gleki> neither gohoi is supported
04:06 < zipcpi> It should be
04:06 < gleki> en;ze'oi
04:06 < gleki> en:ze'oi
04:06 < mensi> ze'oi = [GOhOI] converts following word to selbri-unit: "x1 is related to the meaning of this word in aspect x2"
04:07 < zipcpi> zantufa: zantufa xo'i ba'o
04:07 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "a" cu se tolcri
04:08 < zipcpi> {ze'oi} is a very useful word; it basically allows one to avoid making nonce-zei-lujvo
04:08 < zipcpi> And {go'oi} is pretty popular too
04:09 < zipcpi> So yeah it should be implemented someday
04:09 < gleki> "this word" isnt nice. neither "(n)" is nice in official definitions. it's argument
04:10 < zipcpi> Well it isn't x-anything, unless we want to use {goi} in English defs :p
04:10 < zipcpi> converts following word (goi ko'a) to selbri-unit: "x1 is related to ko'a or the meaning of ko'a in aspect x2"
04:11 < zipcpi> Hah
04:18 < zipcpi> zantufa: zantufa go'oi fa
04:18 < zantufa> (CU [zantufa {go'oi fa}] VAU)
04:24 < ctefaho> coị
04:24 < durka42> coi
04:27 < noncomcinse> coi
04:27 < noncomcinse> doi lo rinsa do mo
04:30 < ctefaho> ɂi mi tinkerino
04:30 < zipcpi> gleki: I dunno, if you don't want to change your def for blalalavla I might just make {comkravla} for a-priori-words in general instead. Your word is fun though, I'll at least give you that :p
04:32 < gleki> zipcpi: ok change
04:34 < zipcpi> Done
04:34 < zipcpi> Er oops
04:34 < zipcpi> I accidentally changed the notes
04:34 < zipcpi> There fixed
04:36 < zipcpi> And lol kreivi. I myself, when making jbofuvi, will just mash together phonemes from appropriate root words. For example if I wanted to make a word like {kreivi} I might take {danlu} and {zutse} and mash them into {dau'utse}
04:38 < durka42> ua
04:38 < durka42> la jbonunsla ba stuzi la .prinstn.
04:38 < durka42> mi pu nova'e co jundi lo nuncasnu be jy
04:38 < zipcpi> se stuzi le'aipei
04:39 < noncomcinse> ua
04:39 < durka42> ku'i la .prinstn. ka'e se klama mi
04:39 < noncomcinse> .i .au .ai klama ju frili mi
04:39 < durka42> oi zo stuzi cu dukti zo zvati
04:40 < noncomcinse> ia ie
04:40 < noncomcinse> .i xu ja'ai zvati la .prinstyn.
04:40 < noncomcinse> ba
04:41 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/tu'oi <-- xu kurtykai
04:41 < durka42> la .piier. cu mrisku ca lo prulamdei
04:41 < noncomcinse> ua
04:41 < durka42> zipcpi: xu sarcu .i zo po'o sarcu
04:42 < durka42> y si banzu
04:42 < zipcpi> If you use po'o you can't make it a member of a set or mass or anything
04:42 < noncomcinse> .i ru'i nai mriste tcida
04:42 < durka42> la djon joi tu'oi = la djon ku po'o
04:43 < noncomcinse> zo tu'oi ki'a
04:43 < zipcpi> You can use {lo gunma bepo'o la .djan.} but that's longer
04:43 < zipcpi> It's a typing thing
04:43 < durka42> isn't there a LAhE for that
04:44 < durka42> lu'o la .djon. ku po'o
04:44 < zipcpi> exp: lu'o la .djon. ku po'o
04:44 < mensi> ([lu'o {la djon <ku po'o>} LUhU] VAU)
04:44 < durka42> lu'o la po'o .djon.
04:44 < durka42> la .djon. joi tu'oi
04:44 < durka42> it's a few pixels longer on my screen but involves zero new words :p
04:45 < zipcpi> lol
04:45 < durka42> also
04:45 < durka42> lo valsi cu kurtykai soi cumki
04:45 < durka42> lo velcki ba'e na kurtykai
04:45 < zipcpi> exp: lu'o po'o la .djon.
04:45 < mensi> ([{lu'o po'o} {la djon KU} LUhU] VAU)
04:45 < durka42> vasru no me fi'ubu
04:45 < zipcpi> Yes it needs to be a lot more longer and dense to qualify :p
04:45 < durka42> pe'i lu lu'o po'o la djon li'u du lu lu'o la djon lu'u po'o li'u
04:46 < zipcpi> zantufa: lu'o ke po'o la .djon.
04:46 < zantufa> ([lu'o {<ke po'o> <la djon KU> KEhE} LUhU] VAU)
04:46 < durka42> "only [the mass composed of Joan]" vs "the mass composed of only Joan"
04:46 < noncomcinse> en: lu'o
04:46 < durka42> this {ke} trick is neat
04:46 < durka42> never knew about it before
04:46 < durka42> is it new?
04:46 < mensi> lu'o = [LAhE] the mass composed of; converts another description type to a mass composed of the members. |
04:46 < mensi> officialdata
04:47 < durka42> or is it an old idea that was never parseable?
04:47 < durka42> yacc: ke po'o la djon
04:47 < zipcpi> I dunno. Selpahi suggested it
04:47 < gleki> zipcpi: the point is that {zutse} here can be malgli ju malropno
04:47 < durka42> yacc says "unknown cmavo po'o"
04:47 < durka42> wat
04:47 < zipcpi> gleki: Which is why a zi'evla
04:47 < zipcpi> lol
04:48 < zipcpi> I mean I purposely chose a malpevna when making {li'armi}
04:48 < zipcpi> And {li'a} itself coms from {klina}, which is another malpevna :p
04:49 < durka42> hh
04:49 < durka42> heh
04:49 < noncomcinse> Is there a bot command to pull up the vlasisku page for X?
04:50 < zipcpi> I don't know
04:51 < noncomcinse> vlaste: this-should-get-no-results
04:51 < vlaste> no results. http://vlasisku.alexburka.com/this-should-get-no-results
04:51 < noncomcinse> I was sorta hoping that might work but nah.
04:53 < noncomcinse> en: lu'e
04:53 < mensi> lu'e = [LAhE] the symbol for (indirect discourse); uses the symbol/word(s) for a sumti as the desired sumti. |
04:53 < mensi> officialdata
04:53 < noncomcinse> uanai
04:53 < selpahi> zipcpi: I think this particular function of {ke} was all guskant's idea. It seemed like a good fix to the {fa ji'a ko'a} problem, but sadly the {ke'e} doesn't auto-terminate after the sumti (because it tries to make a full termset).
04:54 < gleki> alta: ke ji'a mi do prami
04:54 < mensi> (NIhO [I {<FA (¹ke ji'a¹) mi KEhE> <FE do>} CU {prami VAU}])
04:54 < gleki> pa drata cu se jinvi mi
04:55 < gleki> i zo ke pe la alta na dunli zo ke pe lo drata
04:57 < zipcpi> selpahi: spagetufa also implements it but doesn't do the termset thing
04:57 < gleki> alta: ke fa ji'a mi fe do prami
04:57 < mensi> (NIhO [I {ke <(¹fa ji'a¹) mi> <fe do> KEhE} CU {prami VAU}])
04:57 < zipcpi> Oh yeah alta too
04:57 < selpahi> la'a ku'i la .ilmen. cu zanru zo ke pe la zantufa .i ra pu ta'e pante ru'e lo nu zo ge pe lo sumpoi zo'u lo nu lo jorne sumpoi jo'u lo se jorne sumpoi cu dunli lo ka xo kau da cmima .i si'au zo ke pe la zantufa cu jai do'e na'e sarcu
04:57 < zipcpi> spagetufa: ke ji'a mi do prami
04:57 < spagetufa> ([{FA <(¹ke ji'a¹) mi KE'E>} {FE do}] [CU {pràmi VAU}])
04:58 < selpahi> zantufa: ke mi do ke'e je ke do mi ca lo pavdei cu prami
04:58 < zantufa> ([{ke <mi do> ke'e} {je <ke (¹do mi [ca {lo pavdei KU}]¹) KEhE>}] cu [prami VAU])
04:58 < selpahi> .i ju'o sai la .ilmen. cu zanru
04:58 < gleki> zantufa: ge mi viska gi do gi'i
04:58 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [oO] .onai [uU] .i ku'i "i" cu se tolcri
04:58 < gleki> zantufa: ge mi viska gi do
04:58 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [yY] .i ku'i "o" cu se tolcri
04:58 < gleki> zantufa: ge mi viska gi do mo
04:58 < zantufa> (ge [mi CU {viska VAU}] [gi {do CU <mo VAU>}] GIhI)
04:59 < gleki> i ju'onai mi ka'e cikre
04:59 < zipcpi> Oh yeah selpahi, I also added to the TMC list some ideas about the colors thing
04:59 < gleki> selpahi: ta'o xu do di'a kanro
04:59 < selpahi> na go'i
04:59 < gleki> vau coi
04:59 < zipcpi> That fundamentally, the "color red" is the sensation produced by things that are red, is isolation of whether there is anything red to produce them.
05:00 < zipcpi> Similarly, the sensation of dryness
05:01 < noncomcinse> lo skari be losi'o tolcinmo gidei
05:01 < noncomcinse> si si
05:03 < zipcpi> durka42, you might want to have a look at the TMC list - I added some fuel to the color-fire there
05:04 < selpahi> I might need some help later or tomorrow or whenever I'm less sick, with making a couple brivla that I need for my novel.
05:04 < zipcpi> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1LH_bawafDZBp5h4shGoajnTU7sttOilfpyxqUD4B5BM/edit#gid=0
05:04 < zipcpi> Oh, get well soon
05:04 < selpahi> ki'e
05:05 < durka42> ko dei'a bilma
05:05 < durka42> a'o lo nu casnu zo si'o na bilma rinka
05:06 < noncomcinse> .i mi zanfunpa'a be fi do loka ce tolbilma binxo xoi sutra
05:06 < selpahi> mi pu tu'a zo si'o co'a bilma .i pu za lo djedi be li re ja ci
05:07 < selpahi> ki'e la noncomcinse
05:07 < durka42> ua .ei mi na jbibi'o la .berlin. .i da'i mi co'a bilma
05:07 < durka42> zo'o
05:08 < durka42> do finti ji fanva lo cukta
05:08 < durka42> si se cukta
05:08 < selpahi> finti lo brafi'a
05:08 < noncomcinse> lu li re ci li'u simsa banzu .i na nitcu zo'ei zo je
05:08 < durka42> ba'anairu'e i'e
05:08 < selpahi> reci = 23
05:08 < selpahi> re ja ci = 2 or 3
05:09 < selpahi> .i .e'o doi la durka42 ko za'u re'u mojgau mi lo du'u co'a ma kau je co'u ma kau do zvati la .franfurt.
05:10 < noncomcinse> camxes: li rejaci
05:10 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "j" found.
05:10 < noncomcinse> camxes: li vei rejaci
05:10 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "j" found.
05:10 < selpahi> zo .a
05:10 < noncomcinse> exp: li re ja ci
05:10 < mensi> ([li {<re BOI> <ja (¹ci BOI¹)>} LOhO] VAU)
05:10 < noncomcinse> zo'oi .exp.
05:11 < durka42> selpahi: oi za'o na djuno .i la'a lo rebimoi co djedi po'oru'e
05:11 < durka42> mi voikla ca lo cerni be lo resomoi
05:12 < selpahi> uat .i va'i pei zvasta ze'i lo djedi be li so'u sai ba'e pa ?!
05:12 < durka42> .u'i
05:12 < durka42> ti'e la .franfirt. na mutce co cinri lo datygugvi'e .i .ai vitke la .muncen.
05:12 < durka42> pei
05:12 < selpahi> >_<
05:13 < durka42> za'o ka'e platu galfi
05:13 < durka42> ma se stidi do
05:13 < selpahi> .i da'i mi ta'i ma penmi do va'o lo nu do ji'a sai na djuno lo du'u zvati ma kau
05:13 < durka42> mi'e la .karmensandiiegos.
05:13 < zipcpi> u'i
05:13 < selpahi> ...
05:14 < durka42> samkei sitna
05:14 < durka42> .wik Where in the World is Carmen San Diego?
05:14 < selpahi> mi .u'inmo
05:14 < fenki> "Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? is the title of several educational computer games in the Carmen Sandiego series that teach geography and reference skills." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_in_the_World_is_Carmen_San_Diego?
05:14 < selpahi> .i .ei pei mi retsku lo drata no'u di'e .i co'u ma do zvati lo dotygu'e
05:15 < noncomcinse> .i ma se zvati la durka po'u kysy
05:16 < noncomcinse> Can I use le'ai to replace su if I accidentally su?
05:16 < durka42> co'u li D 29 C 13
05:17 < selpahi> cacra xu
05:17 < durka42> cacra
05:17 < zipcpi> noncomcinse: If you accidentally su, not even lawyers can save you zo'o
05:17 < selpahi> ne xu la zelmasti
05:17 < zipcpi> Man that was terrible
05:18 < durka42> ne lo jeftu pamoi'o ie
05:18 < noncomcinse> I accidentally su root is that bad.
05:18 < zipcpi> Oops I accidentally su the world
05:18 < zipcpi> I accidentally su jbovlaste
05:19 < selpahi> zipcpi: Not much worse than all the variations of "You forgot you shoes" when people accidentally drop their {cu}.
05:19 < zipcpi> lol
05:19 < selpahi> Though it carried over into Lojban with {ko dasni lo cutci}
05:20 < zipcpi> :p
05:20 < selpahi> durka42: .oi .i suksa fa lo nu co'u zvati .i mi pu kanpe lo drata ki'u lo na se sanji be mi
05:21 < noncomcinse> .i mi tolmo'i lodu lo mi cutci zvati makau
05:21 < durka42> selpahi: ie mi mabla gunrivzu'e lo nu platu .iau .u'u
05:21 < selpahi> #mencre_klamburi
05:22 < noncomcinse> ie
05:22 < selpahi> Yow! Oohoo! lol #lojban
05:22 < durka42> lol
05:31 < gleki> how do we say "case" as for capitalized letters?
05:31 < noncomcinse> tau
05:31 < gleki> en:tau
05:31 < mensi> tau = [LAU] 2-word letteral/shift: change case for next letteral only.
05:31 < gleki> en:ga'e
05:32 < mensi> ga'e = [BY1] upper-case letteral shift.
05:32 < noncomcinse> Mat = tau my .a'y ty
05:32 < gleki> en:en:to'a
05:32 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
05:32 < noncomcinse> MAT = ga'e my .a'y ty
05:32 < gleki> en:to'a
05:32 < mensi> to'a = [BY1] lower-case letteral shift.
05:32 < gleki> i need to translate "match case"
05:32 < gleki> e.g. in regex
05:32 < noncomcinse> MaT = ga'e my to'a .a'y ty
05:33 < noncomcinse> nilbra
05:33 < noncomcinse> nilbravai
05:33 < noncomcinse> nilbranalvai
05:33 < gleki> en: nilbra
05:33 < mensi> nilbra [< ni barda ≈ Amount abstract big] = x1 is the size of x2 in property/dimension x3 on scale x4. |
05:33 < mensi> xorxes
05:33 < gleki> ienai
05:34 < noncomcinse> capital letters are fanva as barda lerfu
05:34 < noncomcinse> rafsi: jei
05:34 < mensi> zo'oi jez rafsi zo jei .i zo jenmi se rafsi zo'oi jei
05:34 < noncomcinse> jezbra
05:34 < noncomcinse> pei
05:35 < durka42> selpahi: xu mi'o ba penmysi'u ca lo za'umoi co nu mi dotygu'e vitke noi ca ke'a mi vitke .ai .au la .berlin.
05:35 < noncomcinse> lujvo: jei barda lerfu kei vajni
05:35 < zipcpi> I dunno. Capital letter is ga'e zei lerfu, lowercase is to'a zei lerfu
05:36 < mensi> jezbralerkezvai[14694], jezbrale'ukezvai[15183], jezbralerkezvajni[16764], jezbralerfykezvai[16824], jezbardylerkezvai[16844], ...
05:36 < selpahi> durka42: xu ku'i djuno lo du'u ba za'u re'u vitke
05:36 < noncomcinse> jezbralerkezvai = case sensitive
05:36 < durka42> nonselju'o
05:37 < zipcpi> rafsi: ja
05:37 < mensi> zo'oi jav rafsi zo ja
05:37 < zipcpi> k: ga'enjafto'a
05:37 < mensi> (CU [Z:ga'enjafto'a VAU])
05:37 < zipcpi> rafsi: jaf
05:37 < mensi> zo jamfu se rafsi zo'oi jaf
05:37 < zipcpi> u'i
05:37 < noncomcinse> jezbralerkeznalvai = case insensitive
05:37 < zipcpi> ganse jamfu tonga
05:38 < noncomcinse> JA is one selma'o I know all the rafsi for.
05:38 < zipcpi> I'm the king of jbofuvi lol
05:38 < selpahi> I know all cmavo rafsi, but not quite all gismu rafsi. :/
05:38 < noncomcinse> jbofuvi .u'i
05:39 < noncomcinse> xu su'o da djuno fi lo ro cmavo
05:39 < gleki> li'a na go'i
05:39 < selpahi> xu lo ro cmavo cu se menre lo kurtyvla
05:39 < gleki> la kurti cu du'eva'ei sutra
05:40 < noncomcinse> .u'i
05:40 < zipcpi> la'a mi ji'a to'e sidju fi tau le tcini
05:41 < zipcpi> en: no'ai
05:41 < mensi> no'ai = [PA4] digit/number: absolute zero; nothing; there does not exist; ∄ | Mathematically equivalent to no, but
05:41 < mensi> implies lack of negative values, especially on a scale (va'e/va'ei e.g.). Equivalent to "rone'e no". Cf. no'e'u, su'o,
05:41 < mensi> ro, su'oi, ro'oi | spheniscine
05:42 < gleki> ca kelvo li no'ai
06:04 < zipcpi> tu'oi klama tu'oi tu'oi tu'oi tu'oi
06:04 < zipcpi> This is even worse than zi'o :p
06:15 < durka42> oi mi pu bilga lo ka platu .i ku'i na platu .i bu'u ma mi sipna ca lo bavlamnicte
06:15 < gleki> ue zo platu
06:16 < durka42> mo
06:17 < gleki> so'uroi se pilno
06:17 < noncomcinse> coi ru'e
06:17 < noncomcinse> en: unquantifiable
06:18 < mensi> lo nu mulno sisku zo'u: y no da se tolcri
06:23 < noncomcinse> zo tu'o
06:25 < zipcpi> bu'u tu'oi zo'o
06:25 < zipcpi> lo kutydza cu kutydza
07:30 < durka42> .ai vitke lo badydi'u ca lo bavlamdei
08:12  * nuzba @frecafloros: .i mi tavla lo lojban .iu [http://bit.ly/1GKFBAJ]
08:13 < durka42> za'a cmevla brivla co'e
08:26 < ldlework> The difference between universals and tropes is fascinating
08:28 < ldlework> heh interesting, lojbanic form found in non-lojban literature:
08:28 < ldlework> "Relations are usually taken to have a ‘degree’ (‘adicity’, ‘arity’), which depends on the number of objects that they can relate, or, to put it otherwise (somewhat metaphorically), on the number of ‘places’ they come with."
08:34 < farmer> hello everyone
08:35 < noncomcinse> farmer: Hello.
08:36 < ctefaho> ldlework: where is that citation from?
08:37 < ctefaho> hmm this http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/properties/ ?
08:38 < ldlework> ctefaho: yeah
08:38 < ldlework> fascinating page
08:38 < ldlework> "It seems also possible to have definite descriptions and perhaps even indexicals that refer to properties. If Mary happens to prefer wisdom to any other property ‘Mary's favorite property’ seemingly refers to wisdom. Moreover, though more controversially, if someone points to a red object while saying: ‘that shade of red is a beautiful color,’ then the demonstrative ‘that shade of red’ denotes a
08:39 < ldlework> property (Heal 1997)."
08:39 < ctefaho> I will make sure to read through it when the heatstroke has passed
08:39 < ldlework> "Frege (1892) and Russell (1903) had different opinions regarding the ontological import of nominalization."
08:39 < ldlework> haha no kidding
08:42 < ldlework> ctefaho: I have been reading this site for months and months and have notes from all over that are relevant to thinking about lojban
08:42 <@xalbo> coi te cange
08:43 < ldlework> One of my first banski articles will be just a shotgun of links to various sections of various pages, with a snippet and a comment about how it might be interesting to read if you're a lojbanist
08:43 < ctefaho> ldlework: I am most interested
08:43 < ldlework> Will probably do the same for some of the books I have read recently
08:44 < ctefaho> and I love big texts with big reference lists behind
08:44 < ldlework> xalbo: who are you calling a farm?
08:45 <@xalbo> I saw that "farmer" had joined, but missed that ri had quit.
08:45 < ldlework> oh I have parts and joins hidden but I do see 'farmer' above now
08:46 < ldlework> ctefaho: haven't you alluded to articles you have written about various things?
08:46 < ldlework> You're more than just welcome to have them published to Banski
08:46 < ctefaho> ehm I have no articles written anywhere
08:46 < ldlework> Oh okay.
08:46 < ctefaho> I just have my dialect I am tinkering around with
08:46 < ctefaho> dialect/offshot/whatever
08:48 < ldlework> "In seeking explanations in ontology (as in other disciplines) we must frequently weigh tradeoffs between various desiderata, e.g., between simplicity and comprehensiveness, and even between different kinds of simplicity. But one tradeoff is so pervasive that it deserves a name, and we will call it the fundamental ontological tradeoff. The fundamental ontological tradeoff reflects the perennial tension
08:48 < ldlework> between explanatory power and epistemic risk, between a rich, lavish ontology that promises to explain a great deal and a more modest ontology that promises epistemological security. The more machinery we postulate, the more we might hope to explain—but the harder it is to believe in the existence of all the machinery. As we shall see in the following, the inevitability of this tradeoff keeps playing a
08:48 < ldlework> crucial role in current discussions of properties."
08:49 < ctefaho> (The things I think I may have said that implied I have written something about it are just thoughts I have in my head and in some text files here and there)
08:52 < ctefaho> like what I call the "consolodation of truth" which I have more or less just made up
08:53 < ctefaho> but I am very hungry for good reading sources about this
08:53 < ctefaho> http://plato.stanford.edu/ looks awesome though
08:54 < ldlework> it is
08:54 < ldlework> Its my starting point for various topics
08:54 < ldlework> it doesn't really do anything more than scratch the surface of any given topic
08:55 < ldlework> its more of an overview of the history in thinking of those subjects
08:55 < ldlework> so to really get at the content you have to actually go out of the site and look for what they refer to
08:55 < ctefaho> there is no big wall of text better than a well written and well referenced big wall of text
08:55 < ctefaho> I see
08:55 < ldlework> yeah I'm just noting that beyond review it doesn't offer a lot
08:56 < ldlework> but it does offer excellent review
08:56 < ldlework> the best I've found for sure
08:56 < ctefaho> any other similar sites or sources you can recommend?
08:56 < ldlework> its how I found about the concept of Speech Acts
08:56 < ldlework> Which I've been studying pretty specifically for a while
08:56 < ldlework> I have a list of books and whitepapers you can buy
08:57 < ldlework> But no other sites like plato.stanford
08:57 < ctefaho> this one I suppose http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/speech-acts/ ?
08:57 < ldlework> yeah
08:57 < ldlework> and if it interests you, you should definitely get a copy of Searle's Speech Acts
08:57 < ldlework> priceless book imo
09:00 < ctefaho> will look into it
09:00 < ctefaho> but just that site seems awesome enough for now
09:01 < ctefaho> non nom @ all the topics
09:02 < ctefaho> http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth/ ftw
09:03 < ctefaho> many thanks for sharing this
09:22 < gleki> la .lojban.
09:22 < gleki> cu ciplanli lo bangu
09:22 < gleki> .i runbau gi'e se jicmu lo bridi logji
09:23 < gleki> en: ciplanli
09:23 < mensi> ciplanli [< cipra lanli ≈ Test analyze] = l1 experiments l2=c2 by means l3. | Cf. lanli, cipra, tadni, birti. |
09:23 < mensi> tijlan
09:24 < ldlework> Yesterday selpahi alluded to a fact that Lojban was defined to require all places to be filled of any bridi in any context
09:24 < ldlework> Does anyone know what he was referring to and where I could look at it?
09:25 < gleki> CLL
09:26 < ldlework> gleki: sure, but where?
09:26 < gleki> https://lojban.github.io/cll/7/7/
09:27 < ldlework> woah, the CLL even calls zo'e an indefinite pro-sumti
09:27 < ldlework> holy shit
09:27 < ctefaho> hmm?
09:27 < ldlework> I have this theory of zo'e actually being a logical primitive like da
09:28 < ldlework> Where da is an existential reference, zo'e is an indefinite reference
09:28 < ldlework> Where using zo'e directly means something other than "there is really someting filling this place but I'm not saying what"
09:28 < gleki> looks like correct
09:28 < ldlework> Since only da can refer. So zo'e means something else.
09:29 < ctefaho> ldlework: So would "mi klama zo'e" and "mi klama" be different then?
09:29 < ctefaho> or am I misunderstanding
09:29 < gleki> since then koha7 seems to have become *a bit* bigger http://mw.lojban.org/extensions/ilmentufa/i/en/index.html#sisku/KOhA7
09:29 < ldlework> But I feel like the cll just uses 'indefinite' here vastly different than what the word means
09:29 < ldlework> since it goes on to say
09:29 < ldlework>      zo'e    KOhA  zo'e-series   the obvious value
09:29 < ldlework> Where an indefinite description doesn't have an 'obvious value'
09:29 < gleki> ma'oste was written by someone else than CLL
09:30 < ldlework> Well that's the example given in the CLL
09:30 <@xalbo> As far as everything I've seen goes, the "there is really something filling the place" comes from using that selbri at all. All {zo'e} does is add the "I'm not saying what", and even that it only does by omission.
09:30 < gleki> 7/7 even a bit contradicts the def. of zo'e in ma'oste
09:30 < ldlework> xalbo: right
09:30 < ldlework> xalbo: I just got a bit excited at the section title "7. Indefinite pro-sumti and pro-bridi: the zo'e-series and the co'e-series"
09:30 < ldlework> Nothing in the actual section reaffirms zo'e as an indefinite reference
09:31 < selpahi> bilma zei coi
09:31 < ldlework> a'oi
09:31 < gleki> bilma zei co'o zei e'u
09:31 < gleki> i vreta zei e'unmo
09:31 <@xalbo> The docs misuse linguist terms all over the place. If they say "indefinite", it's far more likely to be related to what a layperson would call "indefinite" (ie, "eh, who knows?") than whatever real linguists mean by "indefinite".
09:31 < gleki> i lo kibro se tcana cu infekte lo menli be lo'e remna
09:32 <@xalbo> ba zi .a'o kanro fa ko
09:32 < ldlework> xalbo: right
09:33 < ctefaho> ldlework: zo'e as indefinite - indefinite how?
09:34 < selpahi> The ma'oste was written before the CLL, and in many cases where CLL differs from the ma'oste they simply never bothered to update the ma'oste even before any baseline considerations.
09:34 < selpahi> {me} is one of the biggest examples.
09:34 < ctefaho> and I didn't quite get if you meant an explicit zo'e as being different from an empty argument?
09:34 < ldlework> ctefaho: it doesn't really matter, its a theory no one will ever agree with
09:35 < ldlework> gleki: I don't really see anywhere on that page an assertion about filled bridi
09:35 < ctefaho> Well I am still interested what said theory is
09:36 < ldlework> Its an attempt to deal with scoping problems in the expansion of indefinite speech to logical forms.
09:36 < ldlework> By establishing a secondary primitive with different scoping rules
09:36 < ctefaho> (I am myself very concerned with da vs. zo'e)
09:36 < ldlework> But the literature of indefinite scope is strange and hard to understand
09:36 < ldlework> So its still hard for me to fully understand the implications or how it work exactly
09:37 < ldlework> So I'd rather not embarass myself just yet
09:37 < ctefaho> I see
09:37 < ctefaho> Is it based on http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descriptions/ ?
09:37 < ctefaho> or more than that?
09:38 < ldlework> Well sure, it is a reflection of the yet-unformalization of indefinite speech which is talked about in that article and basically anywhere else descriptions are addressed in LP
09:39 < ldlework> It also has to do with the ontology of properties and predicates
09:39 < ldlework> If indefinite descriptions are not referring descriptions, what do they denote?
09:39 < ldlework> If they denote predicates, why can't you substitute indefinite descriptions for verbial phrases
09:39 < ctefaho> ehm sorry LP as in?
09:40 < ldlework> language philosophy
09:40 < ctefaho> ua
09:41 < ldlework> If they denote properties, what is the ontology of properties, and so on
09:41 < ldlework> And every supposed ontology creates horrible scoping problems that no one really has figured out
09:41 < ctefaho> hmm well I have my own naive idea of definite and indefinite but it seemed to clash with yours
09:41 < ldlework> I don't really have my own ideas, I'm just aware of some established ones. I don't really know what's right.
09:41 < ldlework> Neither does anyone it seems.
09:42 < ctefaho> but it is maybe not the same definite-indefinite as you mean. have to read that article when I am done tinkering some other stuff
09:42 < ldlework> ctefaho: it would seem that it has been established pretty widely that there are two kinds of things that descriptions can denote
09:42 < ctefaho> mhm
09:42 < ldlework> objects, which can exemplify properties, and properties themselves
09:43 < ldlework> But don't exactly divide the kinds of descriptions we can make into these two categories directly
09:43 < ldlework> We actually treat both of these kinds of referrents exactly the same
09:43 < ldlework> And instead we make a distinction on the border of partiuclarity, or rather, identifiability
09:44 < ldlework> In that, descriptions may refer to objects, or properties, but they may do so in one of two modes
09:44 < ldlework> defintie, where some object or property is denoted specifically
09:44 < ldlework> Or indefinite, where some object or property is not denoted specifically, but ... in some otherway that seems to be hard to define, but intuitive to any speaker
09:45 < gleki> ldlework: selpahi here so maybe he can speak for himself. otherwise we can only guess what he meant
09:45 < ctefaho> At the risk of being way wrong I think of indefinite descriptions where something is denoted "referentially"
09:45 < ldlework> If you take the axiom that indefinite description implies that nothing is referred to, then you can go from there.
09:46 < gleki> ldlework: you meant this? http://selpahi.weebly.com/lojban/discourse-sensitive-zoe-and-zio
09:46 < ctefaho> where this referential-something is a referent of something denoted "specifically"
09:46 < ldlework> It would seem that that definition would violate such an axiom
09:46 < gleki> if nothing then thats {noda}
09:46 < gleki> if not applicable then that's {zi'o}
09:46 < ctefaho> "indefinite description implies that nothing is referred to"?
09:47 < ldlework> Yeah
09:47 < ctefaho> Meaning "The cats ate fish" implies no cats are referred to?
09:47 < ldlework> Or more precisely
09:47 < gleki> that seems correct when applied to zo'e
09:47 < ldlework> ctefaho: it means no fish are referred to
09:47 < ctefaho> huh
09:47 < ctefaho> what
09:48 < ctefaho> How is that supposed to make sense?
09:48 < gleki> "referred to" can confuse a lot of people though
09:48 < ldlework> gleki: indeed
09:48 < gleki> since logicians are a tiny part of population
09:48 < ldlework> Reference is a matter of language not logic.
09:48 < ldlework> There is no reference in logic.
09:49 < ctefaho> Ok well in my model, definite refers to a subset of the indefinite
09:49 < ctefaho> if I worded that correctly
09:49 < ctefaho> probably not
09:49 < ldlework> ctefaho: sure, that's getting closer for sure
09:49 < ldlework> Many people conceptualize indefinite reference as referring to some ideal case, or some platonic object, etc
09:49 < ctefaho> "le cmalu noltru" referring to a specific "lo cmalu noltru"
09:49 < ldlework> For which definite references are 'instances' of, etc
09:49 < ctefaho> or to a subset of "lo cmalu noltru"
09:50 < ldlework> ctefaho: well subset implies that lo cmalu noltru refers to the superset
09:50 < ldlework> or simple "all"
09:50 < ldlework> That'd be incorrect
09:50 < gleki> i'd rather rely on discourse since this is easier described both for ordinary people and for programmers
09:50 < ctefaho> I am not sure which terms to use here to say what I mean
09:50 < ldlework> ctefaho: prototype, blueprint, platonic model, etc
09:51 < ldlework> many just use 'property'
09:51 < ldlework> in that "a cat" is really just an instantiation of the property "to-cat"
09:51 < ldlework> In that you're saying
09:51 < ldlework> both there exists something, and that something is characterized by is "catness"
09:51 < ctefaho> ("A dragon" is what predicates to dragon, while "The dragon" simply refers to some "A dragon")
09:51 < ldlework> That's how descriptions are different than non-descriptions
09:52 < ldlework> Right
09:52 < ctefaho> but I probably need to read more to get further than that
09:52 < ldlework> So indefinite descriptions seem to skip the existential coupling
09:52 < ldlework> They seem to posit existence if nessary but don't require it
09:52 < ldlework> Such as
09:52 < ldlework> "Smith's murder is insane."
09:52 < ctefaho> "lo karce" to me is just "zo'e cu karce"
09:53 < ldlework> If no one, especially the speaker, doesn't know who smith's muderer is, the description doesn't refer.
09:53 < ldlework> Instead it seems to stage an instance of the property, and then uses that to predicate upon, to attribute insantiy.
09:53 < ctefaho> (plus xo'e something if one thinks lo should do default quantification)
09:54 < ldlework> ctefaho: that's kind of the direction I was going by establishing zo'e as a non-existential logical primitive
09:54 < ldlework> It would more closely resemble the x in first-order predicate language
09:54 < ldlework> Where in fopl, the variables don't actually represent some external thing for which the predicate are true about
09:54 < ldlework> instead in the caluclus of fopl, x represents an _entailment_ between predicates
09:55 < ldlework> A way in which predicates are logically related to each other
09:55 < ldlework> But in speech when we expand lojban to "fopl-form"
09:55 < ctefaho> and because someone went and made "mei" to a gismu: "lo karce" -> "zo'e cu mecni be li xo'e je karce"
09:55 < ldlework> we abuse da, the thing that represents our referents, as the "x" thing that we see in fopl statements
09:55 < ldlework> But I don't agree this is perfectly isomorphic
09:55 < ldlework> Because what is happening in fopl is not the attribution of predicates to objects
09:55 < ldlework> But the entailment of predicates to other predicates
09:55 < ldlework> And this *exactly* what you do in language
09:56 < ldlework> When you predicate upon indefinite descriptions
09:56 < ldlework> When I say
09:56 < ldlework> Cats have four legs
09:56 < ldlework> I'm not defining some object
09:56 < ctefaho> "le karce" just has that "lo karce" expansion plus me/menre
09:56 < ldlework> and asserting some conjunction
09:56 < ldlework> of
09:56 < ldlework> there exists an X, and that X is a cat AND that X has four legs
09:56 < ldlework> Nay
09:56 < ldlework> Instead I'm establishing a direct link between the predicate "cat" and the predicate "has-four-legs"
09:56 < ldlework> There is no object involved
09:57 < ldlework> So traditionally when we use lojban and expand it to logical forms
09:57 < ldlework> We have been systmatically conflating logical calclus with the action of language
09:57 < ldlework> Conflating definite speech for logical entailment
09:57 < ldlework> When I say
09:57 < ldlework> "Your dad is cool" in language, I only mean to assert that there is some guy, that is cool.
09:58 < ldlework> It is not nessarcy for that guy to be both a dad, and be cool
09:58 < ldlework> and further, there is no logical entailement between dadness and coolness
09:58 < ldlework> But in lojban this is what we aim to prove with the way in which we all go about expanding lojban
09:58 < ldlework> by conflating speech as isomorphic with the calculus of first-order predicate logic
09:59 < ctefaho> mhm
09:59  * selpahi wonders what version of "we" you'd be using if you were saying all this in Lojban.
10:00 < ldlework> Well, when I say "the way in which we expand lojban" I mean everyone who goes about it expanding lojban as far as instances I've seen
10:00 < ldlework> Since everyone seems to use da to refer to the referents of descriptions
10:01 < ldlework> And since everyone seems to agree that the purpose of expanding lojban this way to reflect the underlying predicate logic underneath
10:01 < ldlework> So the apparent conclusion is that everyone makes this conflation
10:01 < ldlework> Between the referents of descriptions in language, the variables in the calculus of predicate logic which reflect predicate entailments.
10:01 < ldlework> s/, /, and
10:01 < fenki> ldlework meant to say: Between the referents of descriptions in language, andthe variables in the calculus of predicate logic which reflect predicate entailments.
10:02 < ldlework> The only kind of speech that happens to map isomorphically to theorems fopl calclus is speech that predicates indefinate descriptions
10:03 < ldlework> as far as I can tell anyway
10:03 < ldlework> Which explains a lot of why CLL descriptions work the way they work honestly
10:04 < ldlework> And why they were not useful and demanded something wholly magical which is lo/xorlo but actually useful of language
10:06  * nuzba @nuttycom: Fantasizing about the creole that would arise among children raised as native speakers of lojban. [http://bit.ly/1Ij3y31]
10:06 < selpahi> How do CLL description work?
10:06  * ctefaho bails out for now, shall return once big walls of text have been conquered
10:07 < gleki> i'e doi la ctefaho
10:07 < ldlework> selpahi: they seem to make assertions about the nature of predicates themselves, having consequence for the scope of what we assert
10:08 < ldlework> Which is all fopl does too, is generate theorems describing entailments between predicates themselves
10:09 < ldlework> But when we speak, we're not always trying to establish new entailments between predicates, but rather ascribe predicates to objects which exemplify those predicates
10:09 < ldlework> It is my impression that this is exactly the problem that xorlo solved
10:09 < ldlework> selpahi: does that differ much from your understanding?
10:13 < gleki> oh my, i seem to have rewritten the whole "terms" section of Lojban.PEG manually including primitive te sumti detection
10:14 < gleki> wht is the tag for {snada}? :P Ithkuil seems to have one.
10:15 < ctefaho> fi'o snada si si
10:15 < gleki> zo uoi zo'o
10:16 < gleki> in ithkuil it's interesting that "to find" is ~= snada lo ka mitysisku
10:16 < ldlework> selpahi: interested to hear what you have to say
10:16 < gleki> not successful at searching but at the goal of the search
10:17 < gleki> snada lo te zukte be lo nu mitysisku
10:26 < selpahi> You keep saying things like "[...] da is an existential reference, zo'e is an indefinite reference.  [...] only da can refer. So zo'e means something else."
10:26 < gleki> where is la zipcpi and la kurti when you need them
10:26 < selpahi> This is quite an abuse of terminology.
10:26 < selpahi> It is very far removed from everything we know.
10:26 < ldlework> selpahi: You mean of conventional lojban terminology? Of course, we started this by talking about some theory that no one would agree with.
10:26 < selpahi> (recall your recent discussion with latro'a)
10:26 < gleki> someone wants to have "la.gerku." account on LMW. not sure if it will work out
10:27 < ldlework> 09:34:58    ldlework | ctefaho: it doesn't really matter, its a theory no one will ever agree with
10:27 < ldlework> I don't know why people have such a hard problem dealing with contexts, or universe of discourse that diverge from the typical one, even when explicitly addressed
10:27 < gleki> oh huh it worked! http://mw.lojban.org/papri/User:La.gerku.
10:27 < gleki> dots in the end!
10:28 < ldlework> I was asking specifically about my words regarding the traditional CLL descriptions and why they demanded xorlo
10:28 < ldlework> But I guess we can just skip all substance and defer to, "You're talking in a way that allows me to talk about your way of talking." :/
10:29 < selpahi> If you could be more specific in your critique of CLL descriptions that would be useful.
10:29 < selpahi> I do not agree that they were useless
10:29 < noncomcinse> coi
10:29 < ldlework> useless is obviously an extreme adjective, I was using for emphasis
10:29 < ldlework> In that they have use, but were less useful for ordinary speech
10:30 < ldlework> was my point
10:30 < gleki> cll was a great attempt at criss-crossing loglang and humanlang. seems to be not interesting these days. still a great attempt.
10:30 < selpahi> Would you like to show an example that goes along with your claim?
10:30 < ldlework> But it doesn't seem like you want to cooperatively explore the thought
10:30 < ldlework> But just wait for me to say something crucially wrong
10:31 < gleki> i can only see whorfian effects there in their greatest form: not speaking a language at all! :D
10:31 < ldlework> I guess I recind my iterrogation.
10:32 < gleki> it's interesting though that CLL was to a large degree written by a kinda programmer+resident of CONLANGS-L mailing list trying to describe formal logic
10:32 < selpahi> He had a completionist attitude, that's why.
10:33 < gleki> xu la kouan cu progypre gi'i ciste admine
10:34 < gleki> i gi'eru'e ba'a
10:34 < selpahi> na .admine ba'e ca ku .i na djuno tu'a lo purci .i ca ku la .aleks. je la .and. cu .admine
10:34 < selpahi> la runbau liste ku sa'e
10:35 < gleki> ti'e la kouan cu se jibri lo ka ciste admine
10:36 < selpahi> mi djuno no da lo srana
10:36 < gleki> ma xe fanva zoi gy. Is Alice more a programmer or a sysadmin.gy.
10:36 < selpahi> .i za'a dai mi fliba lo ka drani spuda
10:36 < gleki> zo'o la alis ku noi progypre cu zmadu la alsi ku noi ciste admine li'o
10:36 < gleki> s/alsi/alis/
10:36 < fenki> gleki meant to say: zo'o la alis ku noi progypre cu zmadu la alis ku noi ciste admine li'o
10:37 < selpahi> me'ei sampla ji me'ei ciste .admine cu traji lo ka la .alis. cu ckaji ke'a
10:37 < gleki> oi oi i clani
10:37 < gleki> vau uenai
10:38 < selpahi> la .xorban. cu se pagbu su sidju valsi .i ku'i na mapti lo jbobau
10:40 < noncomcinse> .i la .xorban. cu mo
10:40 < selpahi> lojbau
10:40 < noncomcinse> camxes: lojbau
10:40 < camxes> (lojbau VAU)
10:40 < gleki> di'a
10:40 < gleki> s/di'a/de'a/
10:40 < fenki> la'oigleki pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi de'a zoi
10:41 < gleki> y
10:41 < selpahi> zo'o la'oigleki cu terpa tu'a zo skudji
10:41 < noncomcinse> je'e .camxes. .i zo lojbau na'e valsrtosmabru ki'u tau re slaka
10:42 < gleki> terpa
10:42 < gleki> s/terpa/ja'a terpa/
10:42 < fenki> la'oi gleki pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi ja'a terpa zoi
10:43 < selpahi> mi zanru ku'i
10:43 < selpahi> .i go'i lo nu lojbo ca ku
10:44 < noncomcinse> .i ma mukti lonu cusku zo ku     .i xu famyma'o djedi zo'o
11:09 < ciuak> hello.
11:10 < gleki> coi
11:11 < ciuak> coi
12:17 < keidji> coi
12:17 < ldlework> coi keidji
12:17 < keidji> doi Idlework do mo
13:17 < selpahi> Where is everyone?
13:19 < selpahi> I was writing a wiki page and then my computer just turned itself off.
13:22 < selpahi> .seen Ilmen
13:22 < fenki> Sorry, I haven't seen ilmen around.
13:23 < Zluglu> menli leaves about 5 hours ago
13:23 < Zluglu> … “left”
13:43  * selpahi starts rewriting everything
18:29 < zipcpi> http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/ganseti
18:54 < iloveass> mi prami lo do zargu
18:55 < iloveass> xu do prami le mi zargu
18:57 < iloveass> co'o rodo
19:28 < sorpaas> How to say "notation" in Lojban?
20:09 < noncomcinse> coi
20:12 < sorpaas> coi
20:12 < noncomcinse> coi sy. do mo
21:28 < gleki> .dict notation
21:28 < fenki> notation — noun: 1. (uncountable) The act, process, method, or an instance of representing by a system or set of marks, signs, figures, or characters, 2. (uncountable) A system of characters, symbols, or abbreviated expressions used in an art or science or in mathematics or logic to express t[...]
21:32 < gleki> lo ciste be lo sinxa - system of symbols/signs/signals
21:33 < gleki> en: kacmyxra
21:33 < mensi> kacmyxra [< kacma pixra ≈ Camera picture] = p1 is a photograph of p2 taken by photographer p3 in medium p4=k3. |
21:33 < mensi> phma
21:34 < gleki> zo'o pixra lo kacma
21:35 < gleki> i pixra lo se kacma
23:20 < gleki> zantufa: ke fami ke fe do mo
23:20 < zantufa> ([ke {<fa mi> <ke (¹fe do¹) KEhE>} KEhE] CU [mo VAU])
23:21 < gleki> zantufa: ke fami ke'e ke fe do mo
23:21 < zantufa> ([{ke <fa mi> ke'e} {ke <fe do> KEhE}] CU [mo VAU])
23:21 < gleki> zantufa: ke fa ke mi ke'e ke fe do mo
23:21 < zantufa> ([ke {<fa (¹ke mi ke'e¹)> <ke (¹fe do¹) KEhE>} KEhE] CU [mo VAU])
23:21 < gleki> zantufa: ke fa ke mi mi ke'e ke fe do mo
23:21 < zantufa> ([{ke <(¹fa [ke mi KEhE]¹) mi> ke'e} {ke <fe do> KEhE}] CU [mo VAU])
23:28 < gleki> zantufa: ke fa mi do ke fi do mo
23:28 < zantufa> ([ke {<fa mi> do <ke (¹fi do¹) KEhE>} KEhE] CU [mo VAU])
23:30 < gleki> spagetufa: ke fa mi do ke fi do mo
23:30 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "m" found.
23:31 < gleki> spagetufa: ke fa mi do fi do mo
23:31 < spagetufa> (CU [ke {CU <(¹[{fa mi} {FE do} {fi do}] CU¹) mo VAU>} KE'E])
23:31 < gleki> yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
23:31 < gleki> akmnlrse: xu te zu'e se gentufa
23:41 < gleki> exp: na ge mo gi mo
23:41 < mensi> (CU [na {ge <CU (¹mo VAU¹)> gi <CU (¹mo VAU¹)> VAU}])
23:41 < gleki> xm i ma smuni
--- Day changed Sat Jul 25 2015
00:30 < cliva> exp: na je gi mo gi mo
00:30 < mensi> (CU [{na je} gi] [CU {mo VAU}] gi [CU {mo VAU}] VAU)
00:30 < cliva> gleki: te zu'e ku ru'e
00:30 < durka42> coi
00:30 < cliva> coi
00:30 < durka42> ca lo bavlamdei mi renkla la muncen
00:30 < cliva> spagetufa: cu so'u nu'i do remna vau mi pavyseljirna vau na nei
00:30 < spagetufa> (cu [so'u BOI] nu'i [{CU <(¹[FI'A do] CU¹) rèmna vau>} {CU <(¹[FI'A mi] CU¹) pavy/sel/jìrna vau>} {CU <(¹na nei¹) VAU>}] VAU NU'U)
00:31 < cliva> xu ca lo pavdei cu zvasto la .franfurt.
00:31 < cliva> .i va'o ku mi klama
00:31 < gleki> spagetufa: ge ba gi ca ma
00:31 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,], [nN] or [rR] but "m" found.
00:31 < gleki> i wanted to make {ge ca gi ba ko'a} gendra.
00:31 < gleki> but all these {[ca gi ca ba] [gi ba]} make it ambiguous.
00:32 < gleki> and selbri autorestorations want to inject {co'e} into {ge ... gi} all the time :)
00:32 < cliva> alta: na ge ti gi ta
00:32 < mensi> (NIhO [I {na <ge (¹FA ti¹) CU (¹COhE VAU¹)> gi <(¹FA ta¹) CU (¹COhE VAU¹)> VAU} VAU])
00:32 < cliva> spagetufa: na ge ti gi ta
00:32 < spagetufa> (CU [na {ge <(¹FA ti¹) VAU> gi <(¹FA ta¹) VAU> VAU}])
00:33 < cliva> .ei ja'ai cikre
00:33 < gleki> cikre ma
00:33 < cliva> lo bi'u nai .gek. lo ka cupra lo sumti je nai lo brirebla
00:34 < gleki> cikre la spagetufa vau xu
00:34 < gleki> i je'e
00:34 < cliva> go'i fa je lo drata ku ru'a
00:34 < cliva> s/fa/fe/
00:34 < fenki> la'oi cliva pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi go'i fe je lo drata ku ru'a zoi
00:35 < durka42> cliva: la'a no'e zvasto la franfurt
00:35 < cliva> .aidji co klama ma
00:35 < durka42> mi renkla fi la stutygart fe lo voizda
00:35 < gleki> lo fa la altatufa cu cnino cu cupra lo sumti
00:36 < cliva> ua
00:36 < gleki> i ku'i le cnino nu'o bredi
00:36 < durka42> mi vitke bagi la muncen ca lo djedi be li re gi la stutygart ca lo djedi be li pa
00:37 < cliva> je'e .i ka'e penmi zai la .ctutkart. ku si'a
00:37 < cliva> .i lo zei sei za'a
00:38 < cliva> lo fa je ke'a ja bo ce'u .altatufa cu cnino sa .i
00:38 < durka42> cliva: ui da'i
00:39 < cliva> cu'e sa'e
00:39 < cliva> mh: test
00:39 < durka42> la'a .irci slilu .i ka'e mrilu fi'o judrysni durka42@gmail.com
00:39 < cliva> je'e
00:53 < gleki> lu lo fa je ke'a ja bo ce'u .altatufa cu cnino li'u ca na gendra
00:54 < gleki> i ku'i
00:54 < gleki> (NIhO [I {FA <lo (¹[{fa <la altatufa KU>} cu] cnino¹) KU>} CU {COhE VAU}]) 
00:55 < gleki> alta: lo fa la .altatufa cu cnino
00:55 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <lo (¹[{fa <la altatufa KU>} cu] cnino¹) KU>} CU {COhE VAU}])
00:55 < gleki> ie i ze'u zo'o gendra
00:57 < akmnlrse> alta: lo cu broda cu broda
00:57 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
00:57 < akmnlrse> alta: lo fa cu broda
00:57 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <lo (¹[{fa ZOhE} cu] broda¹) KU>} CU {COhE VAU}])
00:57 < akmnlrse> alta: lo mi fa cu broda
00:57 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA <lo (¹[NE {DOhE mi} GEhU] [{fa ZOhE} cu] broda¹) KU>} CU {COhE VAU}])
00:59 < gleki> lo'u lo cu broda le'u ge'e i na djuno lo du'u xukau plixau
00:59 < akmnlrse> ie
00:59 < gleki> alta: mo
00:59 < mensi> (NIhO [I {mo VAU}])
00:59 < gleki> alta: cu mo
00:59 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
00:59 < gleki> oi
00:59 < akmnlrse> alta: ni'o i mo
00:59 < mensi> (ni'o [i {mo VAU}])
00:59 < akmnlrse> alta: ni'o i cu mo
00:59 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
01:00 < akmnlrse> alta: ni'o i sei brodacu mo
01:00 < mensi> (ni'o [i {sei <brodacu mo> SEhU}] [COhE VAU])
01:00 < akmnlrse> alta: ni'o i sei broda cu mo
01:00 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
01:00 < akmnlrse> alta: mo .ijebo cu mo
01:00 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
01:01 < gleki> ie ie i lu cu mo li'u pu  jai nabmi
01:02 < akmnlrse> alta: mo vau je mo
01:02 < mensi> (NIhO [I {mo vau} {je CU <mo VAU> VAU}])
01:02 < akmnlrse> za"a zantufa simsa ca
01:02 < gleki> alta: mi prami
01:02 < mensi> (NIhO [I {FA mi} CU {prami VAU}])
01:02 < gleki> exp: mi prami
01:02 < mensi> (mi [CU {prami VAU}])
01:03 < gleki> zo cu di'a te sepli be lo rebla bei lo stedu be'o cmavo
02:58 < f8l> Tachyon`: Small world, eh?
03:05 < Tachyon`> ahh, hello f8l
03:27 < f8l> Do you speak Lojban already?
04:00 < ctefaho> coị
04:27  * nuzba @shukil026: Lojban [http://bit.ly/1SHi2iY]
04:42 < noncomcinse> coi
04:42 < noncomcinse> coi
04:43 < ctefaho> coị coị
04:43 < noncomcinse> coi la ctefa'o do mo
04:46 < ctefaho> .i mi pinxe lo ckafi gi'e co'a cikna
04:47 < noncomcinse> .i ji'a co'a co'e   .i ku'i lo tcati lo ckafi tu'a mi zmadu
04:49 < noncomcinse> .i ku'i mi na ponse
05:01  * nuzba @Naikodemus: Retomamos: http://mw.lojban.org/papri/Lojban#Recursos ; #lojban [http://bit.ly/1D10Vaa]
05:10  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o ce doi darca be ti ko se ba'i klama la jinme bunkere ne zoi fa mumble.metal-bunker.info:64738 fa ce
05:19 < gleki> parsing {ke fa mi fe do mi} etc. in altatufa is as problematic as parsing {fu'e} in standard camxes
05:26  * mumble jorne co'a fa la'o fa akti fa
05:26  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o fa akti fa
05:28 < akmnlrse> test
05:28 < akmnlrse> s/test/zoi zoi/
05:28 < fenki> la'oi akmnlrse pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi zoi zoi zoi
05:28 < noncomcinse> .u'i
05:28 < noncomcinse> There's a reason the delimiter word has a denpa bu after it.
05:32 < gleki> co'o
05:32 < gleki> s/co'o/coi/
05:32 < fenki> la'oi gleki pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.coi.zoi
05:33 < gleki> {zmakai} doesnt solve the problem of "Is Cowan more a sysadmin or a programmer or vice versa?"
05:33 < gleki> oops
05:33 < gleki> {zmakai} doesnt solve the problem of "Is Cowan more a sysadmin than a programmer or vice versa?"
05:35 < akmnlrse> la .kouan. ma trajykai lo ka tsisadmine jo'u lo ka sampla
05:35 < noncomcinse> s
05:35 < akmnlrse> .i ji di'u si'a jai se srera
05:36 < noncomcinse> s/s/WQ.zoi coi lo jbopre zoi zoi.WQ/
05:36 < fenki> la'oi noncomcinse pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.WQ.zoi coi lo jbopre zoi zoi.WQ.zoi
05:36 < noncomcinse> .u'i
05:36 < akmnlrse> .u'i
05:37 < noncomcinse> s
05:37 < noncomcinse> 7:36:35 <noncomcinse> s/s/WQ.zoi si coi lo jbopre fa'o zoi zoi.WQ/
05:37 < noncomcinse> s
05:37 < noncomcinse> s/s/WQ.zoi si coi lo jbopre fa'o zoi zoi.WQ/
05:37 < fenki> la'oi noncomcinse pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.WQ.zoi si coi lo jbopre fa'o zoi zoi.WQ.zoi
05:37 < Ilmen> {la .kouan. cu certu traji lo ka tsisadmine ku je'i lo ka sampla}
05:37 < Ilmen> .e'u ru'e
05:38 < gleki> lo ka ciste admine vau lo ka progypre cu se xi xo zmadu lo ka la kouan cu ckaji ce'u
05:39 < Ilmen> {ma traji lo ka la .kouan. ce'u ckaji ku lo ka ciste .admine ku jo'u lo ka sampla
05:39 < Ilmen> }
05:40 < noncomcinse> s
05:40 < noncomcinse> s/s/WQ.zoi si lu coi lo jbopre  li'u fa'o zoi zoi.WQ/
05:40 < fenki> la'oi noncomcinse pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.WQ.zoi si lu coi lo jbopre  li'u fa'o zoi zoi.WQ.zoi
05:40 < gleki> i can shut down te sumti autodetection using peg thus allowing any cases of {ke fa mi ke fi do mi ke ma cu broda} (te sumti autodetection can be done using cirko's or mukti's tricks) but the problem of {fu'e} still stands
06:01 < noncomcinse> lo xe ckule na djuno fi lo glare djacu gasnu minji
06:01 < noncomcinse> vau .u'i
06:18 < noncomcinse> .i ma fasnu
06:22  * nuzba @blubberquark: We need to agree on common language, like Esperanto or Lojban or JSON # singularity [http://bit.ly/1D1bvxD]
06:22  * nuzba @blubberquark: We need to agree on a common language, like Esperanto or Lojban or JSON #singularity [http://bit.ly/1I0pKji]
06:22 < zipcpi> lol JSON
06:22 < Zearen> .u'i
06:33 < zipcpi> Hm... tempted to make {zvaksu} just to give an alternative to selpahi's zi'ejvo lol
06:33 < ctefaho> doi gleki
06:34 < zipcpi> Wait that's a slinku'i
06:34 < zipcpi> zvasiiu
06:35 < zipcpi> zipcpi, abuser of morphology
06:35 < zipcpi> la zipcpi voi'i malpli lo vlaturge'a
06:37 < zipcpi> spagetufa: zvasiiu
06:38 < zipcpi> za'a na ca zvati
06:38 < cliva> exp: zvasiiu
06:38 < mensi> (CU [zvasiiu VAU])
06:45 < cliva> en: zvasisku
06:46 < mensi> zvasisku [< zvati sisku ≈ At seek] = x1=s1 looks for the location of x2=z1 among location(s) x3=s3=z2 | s2 = "lo ka z1
06:46 < mensi> zvati ce'u", so is eliminated. | Eimi
06:47 < zipcpi> lo pendo be mi cu e'onde mi lo ka ciska lo se jibri cpedu xatra bau lo mejbau tezu'e lo nu xajmi
06:48 < zipcpi> .i mi ciska keji'a lo jbobau xatra
06:48 < zipcpi> coi .i au mi se jibri do .i mi mutce lo ka certu tu'a lo'e skami .i mi kulmu'o fi lo balcu'e lo samske jecu vinta lo li'i jitro lo datnyci'e je lo skami te lanme ja ke xagji sofybakni kei ze'a lo nanca be li mu .i e'u ko spuda fi tu'a lo penmi temjudri poi jai cumki .i ki'esai
06:49 < cliva> la'e di'e ka'e cinri fa'o https://xsznix.github.io/me/jb/ralju.html
06:49 < zipcpi> mi tolsnuti cuxna lo valsi poi cizra
06:49 < zipcpi> lu vinta lo li'i jitro lo datnyci'e je lo skami te lanme ja ke xagji sofybakni li'u
06:51 < zipcpi> ua a'u
06:52 < zipcpi> .iku'i mi na djuno lo du makau mapti valsi lo si'o mu'oi gy job experience gy
06:53 < zipcpi> .iseki'ubo mi malpli zo vinta .i xamzu'e po'o
06:54 < gleki> xu citri lo nu se jibri
06:54 < zipcpi> xy'y ka'e mapti
06:55 < zipcpi> te lanme ja ke xagji sofybakni
08:18 < gleki> why was it even necessary to merge tags when they were so nice splitted in the original camxes
08:18 < gleki> split
09:01 < gleki> i found seomthing strange in masato's parser
09:01 -!- Irssi: #lojban: Total of 152 nicks [3 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 149 normal]
09:02 < gleki> anyone listening here?
09:04 < zipcpi> Hi
09:06 < gleki> termset = termset:(gek_termset / NUhI_clause free* gek terms NUhU_clause? free* gik terms NUhU_clause? free* / NUhI_clause free* terms NUhU_clause? free*) {return _node("termset", expr);}
09:06 < gleki> termset85 = NUhI # gek terms /NUhU#/ gik terms /NUhU#/ | NUhI # terms /NUhU#/
09:06 < gleki> compare the two strings
09:06 < gleki> the second is from cll
09:09 < zipcpi> mi na jimpe
09:09 < gleki> fi lo re xu moi
09:10 < zipcpi> mi na se bangu la .peg.
09:10 < gleki> je'e
09:10 < gleki> i ei denpa tu'a loi drata
09:26 < gleki> gerna: ge ba gi ca ma
09:26 < mensi> O_0
09:26 < gleki> gerna: ge ba gi ca ma mo
09:26 < mensi> O_0
09:27 < gleki> exp: ge ba gi ca ma mo
09:27 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "o" found.
09:27 < gleki> exp: ge ba ku gi ca kku ma mo
09:27 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "k" found.
09:27 < gleki> exp: ge ba ku gi ca ku ma mo
09:27 < mensi> ([{ge <ba ku> gi <ca ku>} ma] [CU {mo VAU}])
09:27 < gleki> gerna: ge ba ku gi ca ku ma mo
09:27 < mensi> O_0
09:57 < akmnlrse> gleki: xu tavla fi la gektermsete
09:59 < akmnlrse> .i pagbu la .camxes. ku pe la camgusmi
10:05  * nuzba @oka_iu_tcan: lojbanはサーバーが貧弱すぎる [http://bit.ly/1IkNwpx]
10:08 < akmnlrse> si'au la xorxo cu finti http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:GCbXv972BnYJ:tiki.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-view_forum_thread.php%3Ftopics_offset%3D1%26topics_sort_mode%3Dhits_asc%26forumId%3D5%26comments_parentId%3D3687+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ch&client=ubuntu&strip=1
10:09 < akmnlrse> ku'i lo mupli ne lu "ge zo by. .a zo beiste gi zo zy. .a zo zgana" cu simlu lo ka toldra
10:09 < akmnlrse> exp: ge zo by. .a zo beiste gi zo zy. .a zo zgana
10:09 < mensi> ([{ge <(¹zo by¹) (¹a [zo beiste]¹)> gi <zo zy>} {a <zo zgana>}] VAU)
10:10 < akmnlrse> zantufa: ge zo by. .a zo beiste gi zo zy. .a zo zgana
10:10 < zantufa> ([ge {<zo by> <a (¹zo beiste¹)>} {gi <zo zy> <a (¹zo zgana¹)>} GIhI] VAU)
10:10 < akmnlrse> spagetufa: ge zo by. .a zo beiste gi ke zo zy. .a zo zgana
10:10 < spagetufa> ([ge {FA <(¹zo by.¹) .a (¹zo bèi/ste¹)>} gi {FA <ke (¹[zo zy.] .a [zo zgàna]¹) KE'E>}] VAU)
10:14 < akmnlrse> s/" /" li'u/
10:14 < fenki> la'oi akmnlrse pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.ku'i lo mupli ne lu "ge zo by. .a zo beiste gi zo zy. .a zo zgana" li'ucu simlu lo ka toldra.zoi
10:24 < akmnlrse> rlpowell: lo kibystu cu simlu lo ka spofu (to denpa tu'a lo selfu co'u lo nu lo jimte cu ditcu toi)
10:29 < gleki> akmnlrse: spofu zea lo mentu be li su'o xo
10:29 < akmnlrse> li su'o 20
10:31 < gleki> mo'u benji SMS
10:31 < akmnlrse> .i'o
10:49  * mumble jorne co'u fa la'o ce doi darca be ti ko se ba'i klama la jinme bunkere ne zoi fa mumble.metal-bunker.info:64738 fa ce
11:13 < noncomcinse> coi lo jbopre do'u mi ve'u klama
11:37 < noncomcinse> eo: tanru
11:38 < mensi> tanru = x1 estas binara metaforo formita per x2 modifanta x3-on, kun signifo x4 en uzo/instanco x5 | (x2 kaj x3 ambaŭ
11:38 < mensi> estas tekstoj aŭ ambaŭ konceptoj si'o) Vidu ankaŭ gismu, smuni. | xorxes
11:38 < noncomcinse> eo: klama
11:38 < mensi> klama = x1 venas/iras al celita loko x2 el deirpunkto x3 tra vojo x4 per rimedo/veturilo x5 | Ankaŭ: vojaĝas, moviĝas al
11:38 < mensi> ... de ...; x1 estas vojaĝanto; (x4 kiel aro inkluzivas punktojn almenaŭ sufiĉajn por difini la vojon).  Vidu ankaŭ
11:38 < mensi> cadzu, bajra, marce, vofli, litru, muvdu, cpare, cmavo ka'a, pluta, bevri, farlu, limna, vitke. |
11:38 < mensi> xorxes
11:44 < gleki> cu'u la robin  ri darno lo skami
11:45 < gleki> i la gek term set zo'u mabla i se pagbu su'e je su'o re da
12:01 < noncomcinse> mi pilno la mensi lonu sidju mi lonu tavla fo la spero
12:01 < noncomcinse> .i'au vau .u'i
12:12 < noncomcinse> si'au smaji
12:48 < Ilmen> coi
13:10 < ctefaho> coị doị
13:11 < ctefaho> laɂ Ilmen
13:14 < ctefaho> hey Ilmen how common is /c/ in French?
13:14 < ctefaho> iirc you speak it
13:15 < Ilmen> coi
13:15 < Ilmen> .i mi ja'a se bangu .i .e'o ze'i denpa
13:16 < Ilmen> Do you mean [ʃ]?
13:17 < Ilmen> [c] doesn't exist in French.
13:17 < ctefaho> ehm
13:17 < ctefaho> french "qui"?
13:17 < Ilmen> Or do you mean the letter "c"?
13:17 < ctefaho> this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_palatal_stop
13:18 < Ilmen> As far as I know, this consonant doesn't exist in modern French.
13:19 < ctefaho> mhm
13:19 < noncomcinse> Is that lojban tc?
13:19 < Ilmen> "qui" is pronounced /ki/
13:20 < Ilmen> And phonetically realized [ki] as well
13:20 < ctefaho> then why does wiki say [ci]
13:21 < ctefaho> ok, right, a range
13:21 < noncomcinse> is /c/ the same as [tc]?
13:21 < Ilmen> As for the [tᶴ] affricate, I think it's mostly present in loanwords.
13:21 < ctefaho> noncomcinse, no, it doesn't exist in lojban
13:22 < noncomcinse> Okay.
13:22 < noncomcinse> English example?
13:22 < tsani> Ilmen: I believe parisians pronounce "tu" somewhat like {tcu}
13:22 < tsani> (Montrealers pronounce "tu" more like {tsu})
13:22 < ctefaho> something like english "keen"
13:23 < ctefaho> coị Sky
13:23 < tsani> coi
13:23 < Ilmen> Possible. I'm not parisian and am not familiar with every French accent.
13:23 < ctefaho> but I got my question answered then I think
13:23 < Ilmen> As for me I pronounce "tu" as [ty]
13:23 < Ilmen> ta'o coi
13:24 < tsani> whoops, yes, those "u" should be "y" in my pronunciations.
13:25 < tsani> Point is, I think that in French, after [t] and before a front vowel, many accents do include a sibilant / use an affricate
13:25 < Ilmen> I don't see any reference to [c] on the relevant Wikipedia articles
13:26 < tsani> .i ta'o mi jinvi lo du'u no roi ba'o ku mi do fasysku tinju'i
13:26 < tsani> .i lo nu do lojbo cusku zo'u mi do tirna
13:26 < Ilmen> ra'o ba'anai .u'i
13:26 < tsani> .u'i
13:29 < noncomcinse> My sister is fluent in French and spent a semester in Paris, she might know. It might be better to find a native, ku'i
13:32 < ctefaho> well after checking french phonology wiki page a bit better it seems [c] is not that common
13:32 < ctefaho> in fact the only mention seems to be "Some speakers pronounce /k/ and /ɡ/ as [c] and [ɟ] before /i, e, ɛ, a, ɛ̃/ and at the end of a word."
13:33 < Ilmen> The Wikipedia article lists [x] as an optional French phoneme in loanwords; however when I hear people pronouncing Spanish personal names, it seems to me they make no pronunciation difference between  Spanish "r" and Spanish "j" ( [x] )
13:37  * nuzba @iswebsitedownow: http://lojban.org is offline again! #down http://www.iswebsitedownnow.com/d/lojban.org [http://bit.ly/1JFEEeX]
13:38 < Ilmen> ctefaho: Interesting. I've never noticed such a phenomenon, but it may have escaped my awareness of course. At least myself I never realize /k/ as [k].
13:38 < Ilmen> er
13:38 < Ilmen> as [c]
13:38 < Ilmen> ja'o se'i mi tatpi
13:39 < ctefaho> I see
13:40 < Ilmen> The wiki article lists /ɲ/ among the phoneme, and I think it says somewhere that /ɲ/ is realized [nj] in some dialects
13:41 < Ilmen> I think I do pronounce /ɲ/ as [nj], although I'm not 100% sure, as I have still some trouble distinguishing them :p
13:41 < Ilmen> It do seem to me that I have the "magner"/"manier" merger
13:42 < durka42> xu casnu lo fraso bankle
13:42 < Ilmen> I pronounce them the same way
13:42 < Ilmen> go'e
13:43 < noncomcinse> What's the IPA for A in American "cats"?
13:43 < Ilmen> æ
13:43 < Ilmen> kæt
13:43 < noncomcinse> kihe
13:43 < Ilmen> Some people think that "a" is better for at least some of the modern dialects
13:44 < noncomcinse> The O in "dog"?
13:44 < noncomcinse> I should really learn the vowels.
13:45 < Ilmen> I'm not good at determining how to pronounce "o" in the American accents, because there have been a split there, causing a disharmony with the British English o sounds
13:45 < Ilmen> But I think it's [dɑg]
13:46 < Ilmen> In British English it would be [dɒg]
13:46 < Ilmen> (the only difference is the lip rounding of the vowel)
13:47 < noncomcinse> kihe
13:48 < ctefaho> I hope yall familiar with [ɧ]
13:48 < Ilmen> It's present in Swedish, if I'm not mistaken
13:48 < noncomcinse> Uh, not familliar with that one.
13:48 < ctefaho> and Kölsch
13:48 < Ilmen> It's a rare consonant
13:48 < ctefaho> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sj-sound
13:49 < ctefaho> it is somewhat like [ʃ] but not quite
13:50 < ctefaho> we also got [ʏ] vs "[ʏ̫]" for anyone interested
13:50 < ctefaho> I still have no idea how I distinguish them
13:51 < ctefaho> or well somewhat
13:51 < noncomcinse> I'm amazed at the Unicode glyphs my phone can render.
13:51 < ctefaho> second one being the "near-close near-front protruded vowel"
13:52 < ctefaho> which only swe and norwegian seem to have
13:52 < noncomcinse> I'm not very familliar with all the weird consonants.
13:53 < ctefaho> first vowel in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sv-ylle.ogg vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sv-ut.ogg
13:53 < fushgrhfhxdz> coi
13:53 < noncomcinse> IPA has the coolest facts of what human speech is capable of, though.
13:53 < ctefaho> yeah
13:54 < noncomcinse> coi la'oi . fushgrhfhxdz .
13:54 < ctefaho> hey let's design a language using IPA as its script
13:54 < ctefaho> all the sounds abound
13:54 < noncomcinse> Just looking at the chart ends up revealing a tribe of clicking people.
13:54 < ctefaho> no one will be able to speak it or hear it but it will be awesome
13:55 < noncomcinse> Oh, dear god. If we actually did make a full IPA language, we'd need five keyboards.
13:55 < durka42> nah just one but it's an APL keyboard
13:55 < fushgrhfhxdz> You could try Ithkuil first, you know, as a low level test.
13:55 < ctefaho> you mean you haven't practiced your [ǂ] today?
13:56 < durka42> my double dagger?
13:56 < noncomcinse> What even, ctefaho?
13:56 < ctefaho> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenuis_palatal_click
13:57 < ctefaho> [ʘ] though
13:57 < fushgrhfhxdz> Alright I'll make this language. I already see some potential
13:57 < ctefaho> or your https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenuis_alveolar_lateral_click
13:58 < noncomcinse> ctefaho: If we did this, just as an experiment, I forsee one thing possibly happening if it became popular enough.
13:59 < fushgrhfhxdz> but does it also have to have tones?
13:59 < noncomcinse> People start using every sound in IPA, this language alone causes sounds to split.
13:59 < ctefaho> oh yes tones too!
13:59 < ctefaho> all of them
13:59 < ctefaho> can we make new ones
14:00 < ctefaho> noncomcinse: and creating new sounds with even finer distinctions?
14:00 < noncomcinse> durka42: APL keyboard?
14:00 < noncomcinse> ctefaho: Yeah.
14:00 < durka42> for the programming language APL
14:00 < ctefaho> then we get new sounds to add!
14:00 < noncomcinse> ctefaho: Which would be added to IPA and then be added to our language. Recurse.
14:00 < durka42> http://www.wickensonline.co.uk/apl/union-large.png
14:00 < durka42> afk
14:01 < noncomcinse> Wow.
14:01 < fushgrhfhxdz> inventing phones sounds like fun
14:03  * ctefaho is happy with his iphone
14:03 < noncomcinse> ctefaho: go'i ra'o naku
14:04 < fushgrhfhxdz> not talking about mobile phones
14:04 < ctefaho> me neither
14:04 < ctefaho> I meant [ʏ̫]
14:04 < noncomcinse> ua je'e
14:04 < ctefaho> zo'osai
14:05 < fushgrhfhxdz> loglang, artlang, engelang?
14:06 < noncomcinse> .i lo fonxa zo'u djica tu'a lo fonxa pe me'e lu pa su'i pa li'u
14:07 < fushgrhfhxdz> lets not make another loglang... id say a mix of artlang and engelang
14:07 < ctefaho> engelang?
14:08 < noncomcinse> .i la'e zoi .urli. https://oneplus.net/one .urli srana
14:08 < noncomcinse> le fonxa
14:10 < ctefaho> "Den riktiga flaggskeppsdödaren"
14:10 < ctefaho> oh my
14:10 < ctefaho> such svenska
14:10 < ctefaho> mycket style
14:10 < ctefaho> waw
14:11 < noncomcinse> sa'ei .uat.
14:11  * ctefaho brb gonna fetch more jordgubbisar
14:14 < ctefaho> more jordgubbisar fetched
14:14 < ctefaho> may the nomness begin
14:17 <@rlpowell> gleki: Forcefully restarting the web server VM.
14:17 < ctefaho> rlpowell: What has been up with the website lately?
14:18 <@rlpowell> I'm going to need a much more specific quesiton.
14:19 < ctefaho> Well why is it down and not up:p
14:19 <@rlpowell> Right now?  Web server VM got stuck.  Dunno what that happens sometimes.
14:19 < noncomcinse> Because the Party says which way is up and which way is Down.
14:19 < ctefaho> ah well I meant more generally
14:19 < noncomcinse> s/D/d/
14:19 < fenki> la'oi noncomcinse pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.Because the Party says which way is up and which way is down..zoi
14:20 < ctefaho> iirc when I was hanging around half a year ago site was basically up 24/7
14:20 < noncomcinse> zo'o
14:20 < ctefaho> never these downtimes
14:21 <@rlpowell> Yay mediawiki.
14:23 <@rlpowell> Its' up now.
14:24 < niek> umop apisdn
14:24 < ctefaho> lel
14:26 < ctefaho> also yay
14:37 < _mukti_> en: kakne
14:37 < mensi> kakne = x1 is able to do/be/capable of doing/being x2 (event/state) under conditions x3 (event/state). | Also: has
14:37 < mensi> talent; know how to; know how to use (= plika'e).  (cf. stati, certu, gasnu (in the time-free potential sense), cmavo
14:37 < mensi> list ka'e, cmavo list nu'o, cmavo list pu'i, djuno, zifre) | officialdata
14:38 < _mukti_> Is the fact that kakne2 is defined as an event rather than a property an artifact of older lojbanic thinking?
14:38 < durka42> pe'i ie
14:38 < _mukti_> coi ki'e la durkavore
14:39 < durka42> I think I remember discussions about this
14:39 < durka42> like whether {mi kakne lo nu do broda} should be interpreted as {mi kakne lo ka gasnu lo nu do broda} or if it's just nonsensical
14:39 < _mukti_> Is there a shade of difference that people perceive between {mi kakne lo ka limna} and {mi kakne lo nu limna{
14:39 < _mukti_> s/{/}/
14:39 < fenki> la'oi _mukti_ pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.Is there a shade of difference that people perceive between }mi kakne lo ka limna} and {mi kakne lo nu limna{.zoi
14:39 < _mukti_> haha
14:40 < durka42> well the second one just doesn't make too much sense to me
14:40 < durka42> (yes the new bot is a little overzealous)
14:40 < _mukti_> Is that your handiwork? It's amazing in any case.
14:41 < _mukti_> So for you, {mi kakne lo nu limna} would be received as meaning what today would be expressed as {mi kakne lo ka limna}?
14:42 < _mukti_> .i ta'o xu do ca'o zvati lo dotygu'e
14:43 < durka42> go'i
14:43 < durka42> ca lo bavlamdei mi renkla la .muncen.
14:43 < _mukti_> ua
14:43 < _mukti_> .i xu do ba vitke fi la .berlin.
14:43 < durka42> {mi kakne lo nu limna} raises the question to me that if x1 isn't you, who is it and how are you controlling their limbs? so given that x1 is you, why not use ka? :)
14:43 < durka42> mi na vitke la berlin
14:44 < durka42> darno dukse
14:44 < _mukti_> .i mi djuno lo du'u darno
14:46 < _mukti_> So structurally, I get the idea that since {nu} doesn't inject a {ce'u}, that {lo nu limna} is dependent on the first {zo'e} using it's magic powers of obviousness to represent {mi}
14:46 < _mukti_> I guess I just wondered if {kakne lo nu} had some residual, useful meaning that {kakne lo ka} does not
14:47 < _mukti_> And in any case, it seems like a good candidate for an updated definition.
14:47 < _mukti_> Since {ka} is not an event.
14:47 < durka42> yes
14:47 < durka42> x1 is capable of having the property x2
14:47 < durka42> cumki fa lo nu x1 ckaji x2
14:47 < _mukti_> This came up when I spent some time today with the 25 most frequent gismu in the ralju korpora
14:47 < durka42> jbo:kakne
14:47 < mensi> kakne = lo nu x1 zukte ja ckaji x2 cu cumki x3
14:48 < durka42> zo zukte ueru'e
14:48 < _mukti_> mi ji'a se spaji tu'a zo zukte
14:49 < _mukti_> So one thing I was doing as I looked over the gismu was considering how useful the places are.
14:49 < _mukti_> A favorite old pastime.
14:50 < _mukti_> What do you think of mutce3?
14:50 < durka42> did you come to the conclusion that under-conditions and by-standard places are mabla and should all be burned? :p
14:50 < durka42> vlaste: mutce
14:50 < vlaste> mutce = x1 is much/extreme in property x2 (ka), towards x3 extreme/direction; x1 is, in x2, very x3.
14:50 < _mukti_> haha, pretty much
14:50 < durka42> huh what do you even put in that x3
14:50 < _mukti_> I have never used mutce3 and would have to look it up if someone else did.
14:50 < durka42> it sounds like if you use a non-obvious x3 you could turn {mutce} into {tolmutce}?
14:50 < _mukti_> I wonder what gleki did with it.
14:50 < durka42> lb:mutce
14:51 < durka42> jb:mutce
14:51 < mensi> mutce = mutce — x1(entity)  is extreme in  x2(property of x1)
14:51 < mensi> :lo mutce — extreme, very.
14:51 < mensi> :ti mutce lo ka kargu — This is very expensive.
14:51 < mensi> :mi mutce lo ka senpi — I highly doubt that.
14:51 < mensi> :Related words: milxe, traji, banli, carmi, nutli
14:51 < durka42> yep he jettisoned it :)
14:51 < _mukti_> Fantastic. Then let's leave it out of "Lojban: The Good Parts". :)
14:51 < _mukti_> cmalu3 was the next one.
14:51 < durka42> is that an upcoming O'Reilly book?
14:51 < _mukti_> jb:cmalu
14:51 < mensi> cmalu = cmalu — x1(entity)  is small in length/width etc.  x2(property of x1)
14:51 < mensi> :lo cmalu — small.
14:51 < mensi> :lo nu penmi ba cmalu lo ka ditcu — The meeting will be short in duration.
14:51 < mensi> :lo cukta cu cmalu lo ka jai vajni — The book is of little importance.
14:51 < mensi> :Related words: caxno, cinla, jarki, tordu, barda
14:52 < _mukti_> One can only hope!
14:52 < durka42> cmalu3 is a by-standard place so you know my opinion!
14:52 < _mukti_> Chop. Done.
14:52 < _mukti_> viska3 falls to the "under conditions" rule.
14:53 < _mukti_> drata3: standard.
14:53 < _mukti_> binxo3: conditions
14:53 < durka42> by-standard => ma'i
14:53 < durka42> under-conditions => va'o
14:54 < _mukti_> How do you feel about kumfa3?
14:54 < _mukti_> lb:kumfa
14:54 < _mukti_> lb: kumfa
14:54 < Ilmen> {mutce3} has fallen out of favor, provided it has ever been in favor. Having zo'e as a defaut for mutce3 would be awful. Now using {mutce} for "a lot" and {toltce} for "a litte" is the preferred usage.
14:54 < _mukti_> coi la .ilmen.
14:54 < durka42> I don't know any of these high-numbered places .u'i .oise'i
14:54 < durka42> vlaste: kumfa
14:54 < vlaste> kumfa = x1 is a room of/in structure x2 surrounded by partitions/walls/ceiling/floor x3 (mass/jo'u).
14:55 < durka42> jb:kumfa
14:55 < mensi> kumfa = kumfa — x1(entity)  is a room in  x2(entity)
14:55 < mensi> :lo kumfa — room.
14:55 < mensi> :lo vi kumfa be lo xotli cu barda — This hotel room is large.
14:55 < mensi> :Related words: bitmu, canlu, zdani
14:55 < Ilmen> co'o ta'o
14:55 < durka42> I dunno kumfa3 seems like it could be useful
14:55 < durka42> bitmu only has places for things it stands between
14:55 < durka42> not things it encoses
14:55 < durka42> encloses*
14:55 < Ilmen> the enclosed part is separated from the outside
14:56 < _mukti_> Ok, I accept that.
14:57 < _mukti_> So in the 10 most frequent gismu in the ralju korpora, that's five places that could be omitted from flashcards.
14:58 < durka42> nice
14:58 < _mukti_> Ok, so here's a different question.
14:58 < _mukti_> en: djica
14:58 < mensi> djica = x1 desires/wants/wishes x2 (event/state) for purpose x3. | If desire is for an object, this is sumti-raising;
14:58 < mensi> use tu'a in x2 (or use lujvo = po'edji).  See also taske, xagji, mukti, nitcu, nelci, pacna, prami, rigni, trina, xebni,
14:58 < mensi> xlura. | officialdata
14:59 < durka42> oh no, the djica question :)
14:59 < _mukti_> {djica lo nu} v. {djica lo ka} ... is there a meaningful difference except for the somewhat implied binding of {lo djica} as {ce'u} in the case of {ka}
14:59 < _mukti_> Yep, that one.
15:00 < durka42> this one is sometimes answered with that one comic
15:00 < _mukti_> Is there a difference of meaning, for example, between {mi djica lo ka ce'u limna} and {mi djica lo nu mi limna} ?
15:00 < durka42> I don't think there is any difference
15:01 < durka42> hey, when I google image search for "ma djica lo nu cenba" I get one of my xkcd translations :)
15:01 < _mukti_> ha!
15:02 < _mukti_> So, there's another place that needs an amended definition. Since {ka} is certainly valid, and is not a property.
15:02 < _mukti_> s/property/event/
15:02 < fenki> la'oi _mukti_ pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.So, there's another place that needs an amended definition. Since {ka} is certainly valid, and is not a event..zoi
15:02 < durka42> anyway the comic is a politician talking to a crowd
15:02 < durka42> {ma djica lo nu cenba} *raucous applause*
15:02 < _mukti_> Right, I know the one you mean.
15:02 < durka42> {ma djica lo ka cenba} *crickets*
15:03 < durka42> ei mi sipna
15:03 < _mukti_> .a'e nai dai
15:03 < _mukti_> .i ko kukte senva
15:03 < durka42> ai mi kukte je senva
15:04 < _mukti_> .u'i
15:28  * nuzba @lojytan_bot: mi ca zvati lo vijytcana / 私は今、空港にいます。 #例文 #ロジバン [http://bit.ly/1gccm4X]
15:40  * nuzba @CapnKronaz: #lojban .i mi masno cilre [http://bit.ly/1I1whKu]
15:42 < sorpaas> What is the difference between {vitke} x2 and {vitke} x3?
15:51 < ldlework> en: vitke
15:51 < mensi> vitke = x1 is a guest/visitor of x2 at place/event x3; x1 visits x2/x3. | See also friti, klama, zasni, xabju, zvati. |
15:51 < mensi> officialdata
15:53 < ctefaho> x3 looks like a bu'u even
15:53 < ctefaho> or a va'o
16:00 < sorpaas> So {lo se vitke} is "host" and {lo te vitke} is a location?
17:27 < shanoxilt> coi ro do
17:53  * nuzba @cizyprijev: .u'i sai https://twitter.com/Saffy/status/624300431787868160 [http://bit.ly/1DFRmIK]
18:17 < _mukti_> coi la'o zoi shanohilt zoi
18:17 < _mukti_> s/shanohilt/shanoxilt
18:17 < fenki> la'oi _mukti_ pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.coi la'o zoi shanoxilt zoi.zoi
18:25 < noncomcinse_> coi
20:39 < _mukti_> jbo: cusku
20:39 < mensi> cusku = x1 benji x2 noi valsi porsi ku'o x3 fu x4 | benji; valsi; porsi; tavla; casnu |
20:39 < mensi> xorxes
20:49 < _mukti_> jbo: zvati
20:49 < mensi> zvati = x1 dunli x2 le ka ce'u fasnu bu'u makau | bu'u | xorxes
22:37 < phma> Does Alberto Fujimori wear a poncho? Or is that ponytco?
23:05 < gleki> {mi kakne lo nu limna} doesnt even say tat we ust assume limna1=ce'u
23:06 < gleki> it can be limna2 as well
--- Day changed Sun Jul 26 2015
00:03 < gleki> spagetufa: ge mi gi do mo
00:03 < spagetufa> ([ge {FA mi} gi {FA do}] [CU {mo VAU}])
00:03 < gleki> spagetufa: ge mi do gi do  mi mo
00:03 < spagetufa> ([ge {<FA mi> <FE do>} gi {<FA do> <FE mi>}] [CU {mo VAU}])
00:17 < gleki> akmnlrse: xu lo ofline versiio be la spagetufa cu zasti
00:25 < akmnlrse> gleki: za'o na
00:26 < akmnlrse> (to .ai mulgau lo uebre versiio ca lo cabdei toi)
00:26 < akmnlrse> .i lo krasi samselpla zo'u ju'oi https://github.com/mezohe/ilmentufa/tree/morfologi
00:30 < gleki> je'e je'e i ta'o mi zei'a jinvi lo du'u PEG mabla
00:30 < gleki> i ku'i pilno ma
00:30 < gleki> i sa'e zo fu'e jai nabmi
00:31 < akmnlrse> je'u nabmi .i ku'i porvanbi funsi gerna
00:31 < akmnlrse> .i pe'i PEG joi lo se jmina proga cu banzuka
00:31 < akmnlrse> si jai banzu
00:32 < gleki> xu do pu'i troci tu'a zo fu'e
00:32 < akmnlrse> na
00:32 < akmnlrse> .i .o'a nai ke ji'a lo gloso za'o na tolspofu
00:33 < akmnlrse> spagetufa: nu
00:33 < spagetufa> (CU [{nu VAU KEI} VAU])
00:33 < akmnlrse> spagetufa: +gloss nu
00:35 < akmnlrse> zu'u nai lo ba'e formata pe PEGJS ja'a pe'i mabla .i ri'a bilga lo ka so'i roi cusku lo mitsi'u je so'i mei
00:36 < akmnlrse> .i ti'e lo panra pe la since cu kanrymau .i mu'a curmi lo nu pa gerna cu se galfi za'u se jmina proga
00:36 < akmnlrse> vau sa'e nai
00:39 < akmnlrse> yyy .i zo mintu .i zo mintu mo
00:45 < akmnlrse> .i si'a xu ke mu'a lu lo so'i protoni li'u ka'e drani
00:48 < gleki> xu lu  protoni be li xo'e li'u
00:49 < akmnlrse> na djuno
00:50 < gleki> ti'e su'e je su'o pa lektoni cu zasti
00:50 < akmnlrse> rarna mupli la iolpre broda
00:51 < akmnlrse> s/pr/p/
00:51 < fenki> la'oi akmnlrse pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.rarna mupli la iolpe broda.zoi
01:07 < gleki> mi kanpe no ka'e zabna danfu be lo zo fu'e nabmi
01:08 < akmnlrse> ba'a simsa lo me ma'oi zoi moi
01:09 < gleki> lo nu setca me'o vei noi cnino cu mabla i lo gerna tricu se tcana cu cenba
01:10 < akmnlrse> ka'e ku zo fu'e se tcita lo ka ma kau ni zo fu'o pe ce'u cu darno
01:40 < akmnlrse> gleki: http://zbagazasni.ax.lt:8000/camxes-exp.html
01:41 < gleki> uesai
01:44 < gleki> i ma judri lo krasi
01:45 < akmnlrse> https://github.com/mezohe/ilmentufa/tree/morfologi (to ba lo nu kibycpa zo'u minde fi tu'a zoi fa git checkout morfologi fa toi)
02:16 < fushgrhfhxdz> banli doi banlihi
02:24 < fushgrhfhxdz> xu voktaha ca lo prulamdje
03:27 < gleki> spagetufa: ge fami klama gi fe do
03:27 < spagetufa> (CU [ge {<fa mi> <CU (¹klàma VAU¹)>} gi {<fe do> VAU} VAU])
03:27 < gleki> uanai
03:27 < gleki> spagetufa: ke fa mi ke'e mo
03:27 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "m" found.
03:27 < gleki> uanai
03:36 < ctefaho> coị
05:08  * nuzba @frecafloros: 俺、この試験が終わったら…lojbanやるんだ… [http://bit.ly/1fwAkXJ]
05:15 < Ilmen> xu la vreji cu nalgunditcu cliva
05:15 < Ilmen> http://www.lojban.org/resources/irclog/lojban/
05:16 < Ilmen> za'a dai no da vreji tau la zelmasti pe lo cabna'a
05:17 < Ilmen> .i ji'a so'u sai da vreji tau lo prula'i masti
05:22 < gleki> mi puzi jungau la robin i ka'e lanli lo mi vreji be lo se irci citri
05:43 < Ilmen> je'e
05:43 < gleki> spagetufa: li zo mlatu
05:43 < spagetufa> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "m" found.
05:43 < gleki> zantufa: li zo mlatu
05:43 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [,] .i ku'i "m" cu se tolcri
05:44 < gleki> xm i nabmi
05:45 < gleki> mensi: doi zipcpi la kurtis cu djica lo nu lu li zo mlatu li'u gendra gi'e sinxa lo pa sumti i ja'o ei lu li cu broda li'u co'u skicu tu'a lo kunti ke namcu ja lerfu porsi
05:45 < mensi> gleki: mi ba benji di'u ba lo nu la'o gy.zipcpi.gy. di'a cusku da
07:35 < gleki> test
07:36 < durka42> no it's broken
07:36 < durka42> can't hear you
07:36 < gleki> test
07:38 < ctefaho> still nothing
07:44 < gleki> u'u
07:45 < durka42> zo'o
07:45 < durka42> cipra ma
07:53 < gleki> na'i i vali po'o
07:53 < gleki> sa
07:53 < gleki> i valsi poho
08:19  * nuzba @fotono: lo #lojban zantufa tricu cu banro milxe i zo iau co'a jufra famyma'o http://guskant.github.io/gerna_cipra/zantufa_farvi.svg [http://bit.ly/1DGUGDf]
08:35  * nuzba @s_i_d_a: lo sefta .e lo    nenri .e lo menli cu    sanji lo crisa    #lojban #haiku [http://bit.ly/1DGWpbK]
08:38 < _mukti_> {troci lo ka co'e} v. {troci lo nu co'e}
08:39 < _mukti_> Is there ever any reason to prefer {troci lo nu}, or is that an artifact of older lojban?
09:00 < _mukti_> I see that {troci lo nu} is used exclusively in .alis., where as .oz. alternates about evenly between {troci lo nu} and {troci lo ka}.
09:01 < _mukti_> So now I'm wondering if there is a difference that people understand between troci + event, and troci + property -- setting aside the obvious fact that the property binds {ce'u}
09:04 < _mukti_> Similarly, .alis. only uses {sutra lo nu}. .oz. also prefers it, but has one instance of {sutra lo ka}.
09:17 < _mukti_> {gleki} is like {sutra}: .alis. uses only {gleki lo nu}, .oz. prefers that but has a few uses of {gleki lo ka}
09:18 < _mukti_> Based on these examples, I'm getting the impression that {lo ka} is being used in .oz. as a specialization of {lo nu} that emphasizes the binding of {ce'u}. But I'm wondering if there are other differences intended.
09:22 < _mukti_> lb: djuno
09:57 < gleki> jb: djuno
09:57 < mensi> djuno = djuno — x1(entity)  knows fact  x2(proposition)  about  x3(entity)  on grounds  x4(proposition)
09:57 < mensi> :lo se djuno — known fact. lo ve djuno — grounds of knowledge.
09:57 < mensi> :mi djuno lo du'u mi zasti vau fo lo du'u mi pensi — I know that I exist since I think.
09:57 < mensi> :mi djuno so'i da la Lojban — I know a lot about Lojban.
09:57 < mensi> :mi djuno mo'a da lo cmaci — I know too little about math.
09:57 < mensi> :Comment: to be familiar with  is se slabu, na'e se cnino, na'e se fange.
09:57 < mensi> :Related words: krici, jinvi, cilre, certu, facki, jijnu, jimpe, senpi, smadi, kakne, birti, mipri, morji, saske,
09:57 < mensi> viska
09:57 < gleki> "lb" is Luxembourgish and one visitor here not only spoke it but even tried to teach it.
09:58 < gleki> _mukti_: {troci lonu} is pre-ka Lojban. it has an underformalized feature that {lo nu} doesnt have any ce'u implied so {troci lo nu limna} can mean the same as {troci lo nu se limna}
09:59 < gleki> i mean for them it was fine.
09:59 < gleki> for us it's underformalized
10:00 < gleki> i dont know when ka+ce'u appeared but gimste has hints to it and it was before nitciion's era ended http://mw.lojban.org/papri/ka,_du%27u,_si%27o,_ce%27u,_zo%27e
10:02 < gleki> tiki doesnt have any more info: http://tiki.lojban.org/tiki/tiki-pagehistory.php?page=%27%27ka%27%27+versus+%27%27du%27u%27%27%2C+and+%27%27ce%27u%27%27+and+%27%27zo%27e%27%27
10:02 < gleki> imported in nov 2001 from phpwiki.
10:02 < gleki> phpwiki is lost
10:02 < gleki> at least robin doesnt have it
10:02 < gleki> if you can scrap the wole lojban.org section of archive.org maybe you can find it
10:03 < gleki> *whole
10:04 < Taun> I came in here for one quick question: what's an short, easy way to specify distance traveled? "I walked five miles (long distance units)." Would it be appropriate to say "mi cadzu veka'a le minli be li mu?"
10:04 < gleki> mi cadzu vi'i lo minli be li mu
10:04 < gleki> {veka'a} is also fine
10:05 < Taun> ki'e ki'e
10:09  * nuzba @youxkei: ロジバンでLooks good to meってどう言えば良いんでしょう？ #lojban [http://bit.ly/1gdQB4E]
10:19  * nuzba @youxkei: galfiのx1は出来事、cnegauのx1は人、ってことで良いんです・・・？ #lojban [http://bit.ly/1I2TM5P]
10:39 < selpahi> _mukti_: ju'i
10:44 < _mukti_> re'i la selpa'i
10:44 < selpahi> I see you're asking about {lo ka}. If you're still reading Oz and looking for errata to add to the spreadsheet, {sutra lo nu} may be added as an erratum. And any other situation where you see two different abstraction types in one sumti place does at least warrant a comment.
10:45 < _mukti_> Yes, still working on errata, though mostly lower concept stuff than that. I'll go ahead and flag those uses though.
10:45 < selpahi> When I started working on Oz I was still using {lo nu} with most predicates, but I made the switch to {ka} before I finished, and then I had to replace everything manually. I missed a lot.
10:46 < _mukti_> Right now, I'm going through the gismu and trying to develop a better set of flash cards than the ones I've been using on Memrise forever.
10:46 < selpahi> Asiz already spotted most of them though
10:46 < selpahi> And I corrected them
10:46 < selpahi> That sounds useful
10:46 < _mukti_> In doing so, I've been looking at some of the "event" places, and trying to reconcile them with what I've seen in contemporary usage.
10:47 < _mukti_> I'll post the results of the first 100 for comments.
10:47 < selpahi> Cool.
10:47 < gleki> first 100 most frequent?
10:47 < _mukti_> Yes, but only looking at ralju korpora.
10:48 < _mukti_> Maybe I should throw the net wider. What do you think?
10:48 < selpahi> Oh you're excluding IRC? IRC is by far the biggest corpus
10:48 < selpahi> it's also the most varied though
10:48 < gleki> what people are missing usually is that they remember gismu as "x1 does x2 to x3 at temperature  x4" but when they are asked "how to say temperature?" few of them ar ready to say {lo ve broda}
10:48 < _mukti_> I figure that it's the biggest, but also skewed to discussions of language, etc.
10:48 < gleki> and learning isolating words .... idk ... looks like the worst method of learning languages
10:49 < gleki> even {lo ve broda cu xamgu} is 100 times better
10:49 < _mukti_> That said, visual and speech related gismu seem overrepresented in the korpora ue nai
10:49 < selpahi> mi tugni .i ku'i pe'i na palcau fa lo nu jboske lanli lo gismu
10:50 < selpahi> {cu cusku} is soooo common, it makes you think Lojban is only {c}.
10:50 < gleki> lo since sance
10:51 < _mukti_> Another thing that I've noticed as I've walked through the gismu -- I imagine this must have been commented upon at some time -- is a fairly quiet distinction between gismu with a sense of agency in x1 and those without.
10:51 < _mukti_> {klama} v. {muvdu} for example
10:51 < gleki> la bangu dictionary has examples that are sometimes too difficult for newbies to parse.
10:52 < gleki> i have anther idea but it'd require as much time as i spent for this dictionary
10:52 < _mukti_> {viska} v. {catlu}
10:52 < gleki> catlu limited to vision?
10:53 < _mukti_> My understanding of {catlu} is visual, but then I could well be wrong.
10:53 < selpahi> Lojban has to make certain kinds of distinctions (like agency) at the gismu level, because delegating it to compound words would make the words too long.
10:53 < selpahi> Lojban just doesn't have the luxury that Toaq Dzu has.
10:53 < VladVP> coi rodo
10:54 < gleki> ue coi lo ba'o rusko
10:54 < selpahi> Toaq Dzu's predicates are all way more primitive and minimalistic, and they get combined in all sorts of ways to derive distinctions.
10:54 < selpahi> Which costs only one syllable. But ta'o nai.
10:54 < selpahi> There are some gismu where usage sometimes ignores the agency vs event distinction, like {galfi}
10:55 < selpahi> xorxes seems one of the main proponents of this kind of conflation.
10:55 < selpahi> It's practical, no question.
10:56 < _mukti_> I think I've seen {sutra} used with a sense of agency somewhere, like "hurry"
10:56 < VladVP> la .repak. cu xagrai lo ro ra'apxu
10:56 < VladVP> someone confirm whether that was grammatical
10:56 < gleki> in {catlu} the expression of directiontowards which the perceiver turns their gaze in order to see a phenomenon is obligatory. {zgana} doesnt have such implications. But as for "vision" im not sure such ilimtation should be put onto it.
10:57 < selpahi> la re palku
10:57 < selpahi> Yes, VladVP.
10:57 < VladVP> phew
10:57 < selpahi> You still got it :P
10:57 < VladVP> my Lojban is still in order after 6 months
10:57 < _mukti_> gleki: How would that differ from {jundi} ?
10:58 < _mukti_> (which I also understand as directional attention)
10:58 < _mukti_> I guess I should say "targeted" rather than "directional" -- perhaps that's the distinction.
10:59 < _mukti_> {jundi} specifies a target without presupposing a mediating direction
10:59 < _mukti_> On the other hand, "mediating direction" sounds like a missing slot
11:00 < gleki> _mukti_: {catlu} vs. {jundi}?
11:01 < gleki> anyway i stole that quote from http://www.humnet.unipi.it/linguistica/Docenti/Lenci/papers/johnsonLenci.CF.2011.pdf
11:01 < selpahi> What are your opinions on the concept of "canon" in the context of Lojban non-gismu vocabulary. Obviously, there is no such thing as an official gismu, but maybe a milder level of officialness could be  beneficial.
11:02 < selpahi> s/official gismu/official lujvo
11:02 < fenki> la'oi selpahi pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.What are your opinions on the concept of "canon" in the context of Lojban non-gismu vocabulary. Obviously, there is no such thing as an official lujvo, but maybe a milder level of officialness could be  beneficial..zoi
11:02 < selpahi> Like that.
11:03 < gleki> o'u
11:03 < gleki> u'i
11:03 < gleki> i tcefrica
11:03 < selpahi> .u'i
11:03 < gleki> pe'i lo jvajvo cu ei zasti
11:04 < _mukti_> I think that the notion of canonical lujvo has never been adequately developed. The failure to produce a dictionary that would have defined canonical lujvo gave birth to BPFK, but BPFK has, until recently, always been consumed with improving cmavo definitions.
11:04 < gleki>  develop the sceinc
11:04 < _mukti_> I think the jbovlaste voting system was supposed to be a step in the direction of defining a canon for such words, but we all know the limitations of that.
11:05 < gleki> sorry my connection (or is it vrici) is terrible
11:05 < gleki>  develop the science of rafsi slotting
11:06 < _mukti_> Sometimes I wish there were two systems for forming lujvo, such that the resulting lujvo would indicate whether or not it was intended to convey a sense beyond what might be inferred from it's components, ala luvjo.
11:06 < gleki> shut down this terrible esperanto affix system
11:06 < _mukti_> s/luvjo/jvajvo/
11:06 < fenki> la'oi _mukti_ pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.Sometimes I wish there were two systems for forming lujvo, such that the resulting lujvo would indicate whether or not it was intended to convey a sense beyond what might be inferred from it's components, ala jvajvo..zoi
11:07 < gleki> such system was prposed once
11:07 < _mukti_> Which is to say, for a lojbanist who had some familiarity with rafsi, but perhaps not much lujvo vocabulary, they would be able to know where their vocabularity needed to grow.
11:08 < _mukti_> Failing to understand lujvo was a serious obstacle to my reading for a while. And I'm much better now, but as I read lujvo, I'm largely assuming jvajvo meanings, and not aware of lujvo that have actually been narrowly defined.
11:09 < _mukti_> Perhaps "jvajvo" is too narrow here: I mean I assume the same kind of meanings that could have been derived from analogous tanru, etc.
11:09 < gleki> google rafybri. but since this proposal was ignored it wasnt further developed
11:10 < _mukti_> gleki: When was that? (googling now)
11:11 < gleki> now i can only see that the power of {lo TAG broda} and {i ko'a TAG broda} instead of just {ko'a cu broda} has been underestimated.
11:11 < _mukti_> The Great Rafsi Reallocation in some ways aggravated this problem, since it made lujvo unambiguous relative to their rafsi.
11:11 < gleki> but it made the language much harder to learn
11:11 < _mukti_> The reallocation did?
11:11 < gleki> #zgaga'aza'azganzgana
11:12 < durka42> coicoi
11:12 < _mukti_> You mean by encouraging nonce lujvo?
11:12 < _mukti_> coi la durkavore
11:12 < durka42> before the GRR, lujvo weren't 1-to-1?
11:13 < durka42> rafsi*
11:13 < _mukti_> Oh, I think I do have the history wrong, durka.
11:13 < _mukti_> I guess before GRR there were assignments, which were changed.
11:13 < _mukti_> Do I incorrectly remember that there was a time before assignments?
11:14 < durka42> ba'anairu'e in TLI Loglan times they just kinda made up lujvo and sometimes even gave them gismu shapes
11:14 < gleki> loglan version 1 i.e. in SciAm there were no rafsi
11:14 < selpahi> I don't think there was a time before assignments.
11:14 < gleki> there were only jbofuvi
11:14 < selpahi> They changed them to give the more useful rafsi to the more common gismu.
11:15 < selpahi> They kept a few where the userbase was already too used to the old assignment.
11:16 < gleki> #zgaga'aza'azganzgana problem is explained here mukti: https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/6H7JgQOJTzk/discussion
11:16 < _mukti_> ua
11:18 < gleki> also i consider -gau lujvo shifting places to the right as something unnaturalistic. as for {jungau} i perceive it just like a new fu'ivla since this is how known natlangs work (consider english "to inform")
11:18 < _mukti_> Yes, I'm looking at JL1. There's a list of "primitives" and their "affixes", along with discussion of how to create "complexes" with them.
11:18 < _mukti_> I think part of that discussion may touch on the origin of noralujv
11:18 < durka42> I don't think -gau is unnatural
11:18 < durka42> A does B
11:19 < gleki> i consider bramlatu/cmabroda as something naturalistic but wouldn't make them jvajvo.
11:19 < durka42> A causes B to do C
11:19 < durka42> ^ shifted places
11:19 < durka42> but part of the goal of lojban is to be unnatural isn't it :p
11:19 < gleki> that's not exactly how lojban works
11:19 < gleki> {jai gau fai} is naturalistic to me though
11:20 < gleki> although superlong but that's another issue :D
11:20 < _mukti_> Wow, a lot of jboci'a in that thread.
11:20 < selpahi> durka42: The one difference there is that "to do" is a special FA that let's you avoid counting.
11:21 < durka42> yeah well we don't normally count, fair point :)
11:22 < durka42> ta'osai I was wondering today if there is a "null BAI"
11:22 < selpahi> Learning {jungau} as a standalone word is much easier (though you can note to yourself that it follows the ctuca-pattern)
11:22 < durka42> for example if I asked {do klama fi'a la .bastn.} and the answer should be "no such FA/BAI would make that true"
11:22 < selpahi> Thing is, you don't need to even know {gasnu} to learn {jungau}.
11:22 < durka42> no bu'a zo'u mi klama fi'o bu'a la .bastn.
11:23 < durka42> (ta'o toi'e ta'o is that how {bu'a} works‽)
11:23 < gleki> zo'o fa xi tu'o
11:23 < _mukti_> I agree that learning lujvo is a good idea, and not any more difficult than learning other vocabulary. I think it's the lack of a canon which is the stumbling point, and perhaps what selpahi was at earlier.
11:23 < durka42> gleki: fa xi mo'e noda, I guess...
11:23 < gleki> the difference is that natlangs dont proliferate lujvo that much. they have rules
11:23 < durka42> camxes: faximo'enoda
11:23 < camxes> SyntaxError: Expected [yY] but "x" found.
11:23 < durka42> camxes: +exp faximo'enoda
11:23 < camxes> ([{fa <xi (¹mo'e [{no BOI} da] TEhU¹) BOI>} KU] VAU)
11:23 < gleki> exp: faimo'eda
11:23 < gleki> exp: fxaimo'eda
11:23 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [0123456789] but "d" found.
11:23 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [.\t\n\r?! ] but "f" found.
11:23 < gleki> darn
11:23 < gleki> ju'inai
11:24 < durka42> german proliferates lujvo a lot :)
11:24 < _mukti_> I'm reflecting now on my childhood experience as I first began to recognize latin and greek particles in words. I didn't assume that I didn't need to learn words and could infer them from the particles.
11:24  * gleki to'o bajra gi'e curmi lo nu lo dotco cu spuda
11:24 < selpahi> I think German is the same as English, except German's lujvo and tanru both look like lujvo, whereas in English both look like tanru.
11:25 < _mukti_> fireman
11:25 < gleki> okay, mukti noticed that -ske is a candidate for jvajvo generator
11:25 < durka42> you mean german often uses compound words where english would use a noun phrase
11:25 < durka42> ?
11:25 < selpahi> I mean the insertion of spaces
11:25 < gleki> but then limit -ske lujvo to two places
11:25 < durka42> yeah
11:25 < durka42> I have a small dictionary and I am often guessing word boundaries :)
11:26 < gleki> for fireman it's -pre usually unless you again limit yourself to two places
11:26 < gleki> btw who will finally write Link Grammar for Lojban? paunai
11:26 < durka42> but today I said a full sentence in German and was sort of understood!
11:26 < durka42> with selpahi's help
11:26 < durka42> four whole words :p
11:26 < gleki> xu lo re do pu'i penmi zu'ai
11:26 < _mukti_> "fireman" though is a good example of a non-javni compound... since it could just as easily mean "arsonist"
11:26 < selpahi> Something about beer?
11:27 < durka42> well similar
11:27 < durka42> mi cusku zoi dy Ich essen keine Brot dy
11:27 < selpahi> ma na'o basti lo nanba lo ka do citka
11:28 < durka42> mi vitke lo .itlo gusta .i dunda lo nanba me'oi Vorspeisen .i mi cusku ri .i lo nanba cu canci jecu se basti lo salta
11:28 < durka42> y
11:29 < durka42> lo rismi mu'a
11:29 < selpahi> ua .i xu lo cersai ta'e se pagbu lo rismi
11:29 < durka42> ja lo nanba be na'e bo lo maxri
11:30 < selpahi> je'e
11:30 < durka42> .u'i .i ta'e cersai lo djoguro jo'u lo grute
11:30 < selpahi> je'e
11:31 < gleki> en: basti
11:31 < mensi> basti = x1 replaces/substitutes for/instead of x2 in circumstance x3; x1 is a replacement/substitute. | See also cmavo
11:31 < mensi> list ba'i, binra. | officialdata
11:31 < gleki> li'a nabmi la vrici
11:31 < _mukti_> doi la durkavore do'u .i xu do citka lo bavmi
11:31 < durka42> lo kukfusra plise xalkai cu basti lo birje .i ku'i na basti .u'i
11:32 < gleki> i ja'o sei zabna mi deha jundi
11:32 < durka42> lo bavmi na ku
11:32 < _mukti_> ua
11:32 < selpahi> do ma jinvi lo dotco birje noi ka'u banlyrai
11:32 < durka42> lo xrilanbi sa'e
11:33 < durka42> ti'esai banlyrai
11:33 < durka42> xu da dotco ke plise co'e
11:33 < selpahi> mi djuno no da lo birje ja lo simsa .i mi na pinxe
11:34 < _mukti_> ue sai .i mi sruma lo du'u do taske doi la selpa'i zo'o
11:35 < selpahi> taske lo djacu
11:35 < _mukti_> je'e .u'o
11:35 < _mukti_> s/u'o/o'u/
11:35 < fenki> la'oi _mukti_ pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.je'e .o'u.zoi
11:36 < durka42> pinxe xu lo drata xalka
11:36 < selpahi> lo xalka zo'u mi pilno ri ji'i no drata be lo ka lumci
11:36 < selpahi> .i na go'e
11:37 < _mukti_> .i xu do ta'e pinxe lo plise xalka doi la durkavore
11:37 < durka42> je'e selpa'i
11:37 < durka42> go'i doi mukti
11:37 < selpahi> ma te frica lo plise xalka lo plise vanju
11:38 < _mukti_> mi ji'a go'i
11:38 < _mukti_> la'a mi pu smuni lo simsa
11:38 < _mukti_> s/smuni/skudji
11:38 < fenki> la'oi _mukti_ pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.la'a mi pu skudji lo simsa.zoi
11:38 < durka42> y lo plise vanju cu mo
11:39 < selpahi> vanju lo plise
11:39 < durka42> lo kukfusra plise xalka cu simsa lo birje
11:39 < _mukti_> lo vanju ja birje be lo plise
11:40 < durka42> lo vanju ta'e na fonmo
11:40 < _mukti_> mi na tugni
11:40 < _mukti_> .i ku'i mi ta'e pinxe la'o zoi prosecco zoi
11:40 < selpahi> ie pei doi la mensi
11:40 < mensi> ba'e mi na tugni
11:41 < durka42> ie lo proseko je lo carmi pagne cu fonmo
11:41 < _mukti_> .u'i
11:41 < _mukti_> ie mi ta'e pagne gi'u carmi
11:44 < durka42> ku'i ma valsi lo se skicu be mi
11:45 < durka42> lo poi'i xalka se pinxe jecu se zbasu fi lo kukfusra te marxa be lo grute (to mu'a lo plise ja lo perli toi)
11:47 < _mukti_> za'a zo'oi champagne cu se vlaka zo'oi campania noi latmo gi'e se smuni lo du'u foldi
11:47 < durka42> smuni lo stuzi xunai
11:49 < _mukti_> What is a smuni anyway. Is it a du'u?
11:49 < _mukti_> I often stumble with du'u and se du'u
11:50 < durka42> I guess it's a du'u
11:50 < durka42> lo sedu'u co'e refers to text
11:50 < _mukti_> That's what I was thinking ... thanks
12:07 < akmnlrse> gleki: za'o na cazgau tu'a lo zo ke termsete .i kanpe lo du'u su'o xagmau cu ka'e danfu
12:07 < akmnlrse> selpahi: na snada lo ka voksnu .i la .ilmen. ku po'o kansa fa noi na zifre lo ka bacru
12:07 < Ilmen> coi mi'e di'a jundi
12:07 < durka42> coi dicra jundi
12:08 < akmnlrse> durka42: la'a mi se cfipu sai tu'a lo nu do ca ma kau ma kau zvati
12:08 < Ilmen> za'a ca lo nu tavla fi mi cu tolcanci fa mi .i mapti nu cabna
12:08 < akmnlrse> .i do cliva ca lo 28 moi vau xu
12:08 < durka42> mi fuzme .i mi mabla platu
12:09 < durka42> mi klama la .ctutkart. lo ca se zvati ca lo 28moi
12:09 < akmnlrse> mi si'a go'i
12:09 < akmnlrse> si go'e
12:09 < akmnlrse> .i xu voikla fi ba'e C
12:09 < durka42> C naje F
12:10 < durka42> ca lo 29moi
12:10 < akmnlrse> ua ru'e
12:10 < akmnlrse> .i na nabmi fa lo nu mi zvati ca lo 28 moi
12:10 < akmnlrse> .i lo trene canlu na tai culno
12:11 < selpahi> doi la .akme ma ralju lo nu mukti be lo nu do benji fi mi fe lo vreji .i xu do kanpe lo nu srana lo zgike
12:11 < selpahi> .i va'o ro da mi gleki lo nu viska la .rnuomer.
12:12 < akmnlrse> na kanpe .i sa'u lo se .irci cu mutce co zenba lo ka tolcando .i je ca lo bi'u nai djedi la sonja cu vitke
12:12 < akmnlrse> soi na sai cafne
12:12 < Ilmen> ŭa .rnu'omer. do'e ma
12:12 < akmnlrse> lo tokpona se .irci
12:13 < selpahi> je'e .i la sonja cu se slabu mi .i mi pu so'o  tavla ri
12:13 < Ilmen> ĭe pu za lo djedi be li so'o mi ganse lo nu la tokpona finti cu co'a jundi la .lojban. gi'e cusku zo coi
12:14 < selpahi> s/so'o/so'o roi
12:14 < fenki> la'oi selpahi pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.je'e .i la sonja cu se slabu mi .i mi pu so'o roi  tavla ri.zoi
12:14 < Ilmen> coi ro do
12:14 < selpahi> coi
12:14 < Ilmen> .i ma nuzba
12:14 < selpahi> mi ze'a pu bilma
12:14 < durka42> xu mo'u bilma
12:15 < selpahi> na go'i
12:15 < Ilmen> .oi dai .i xu vidru ja jurme bilma
12:15 < selpahi> .i ku'i simlu lo ka zenba lo ka kanro
12:15 < selpahi> .i mi na djuno
12:15 < selpahi> .i la'a .influ'enza
12:15 < Ilmen> .i ku'i lo nu bilma je ba bo cu di'a kanro cu selja'e lo nu zenba co .i'onmo lo nu kanro
12:16 < selpahi> go'i
12:17 < selpahi> .i sa'u doi la akmnlrse mi pu no'e jimpe lo du'u ma kau mukti lo nu benji
12:17 < selpahi> .i ku'i .i'onmo
12:17 < Ilmen> .oi dai .i ju'o cu'i mi no roi bilma la .influ'enza .i la'a lo nu mi darno lo tcadu cu krinu .u'i .i ti'e mabla se bilma
12:17 < selpahi> xu go'i
12:18 < selpahi> .i lo me mi moi na tsali klesi lo .influ'enza .i mu'a na vamtu
12:18 < Ilmen> je'e
12:19 < selpahi> mi xebni lo nu lo nu lo nazbi tubnu cu culno cu rinka lo nu na'e prane tirna
12:21 < selpahi> en:traffic light
12:21 < mensi> 2 da se tolcri: fletrogusmi'i, jezystisni
12:21 < selpahi> .u'i
12:24 < Ilmen> ba'a nai ru'e do pu xusra lodu ba lo nu mo'u bilma cu la'a djucpe fi loka finti su cfika brivo
12:25 < selpahi> go'i .i je'u mi pu zi pensi lo mintu
12:47 < selpahi> xu lo kanvasa poi te ciska no da cu kunti jo'a pei
12:47 < selpahi> .i ma drani valsi
12:47 < durka42> la'a kunti
12:47 < selpahi> .i zoi gy. blank .gy
12:48 < durka42> nu'o co'e
12:48 < selpahi> .i lo kanvasa na vasru .i na sruri lo cinta
12:49 < durka42> relcimde kunti
12:50 < selpahi> .i ku'i .ambigu .i lu lo va kanvasa cu kunti li'u .i  se smuni lo du'u no da nenri kei ji lo du'u no da cpana lo sefta
12:50 < selpahi> .i mi na se mansa
12:50 < durka42> ku'i na'i da nenri lo kanvasa
12:51 < Ilmen> pircau
12:52 < Ilmen> nu'o te ciska
12:52 < selpahi> mablyme'a .i mo lo pelji boxfo poi te ciska no da
12:53 < selpahi> .i ma kampu lo ro srana
12:53 < Ilmen> no da su'o de ciska ko'a
12:53 < durka42> lo pelji boxfo cu simsa lo kanvasa lo ka ka'e relcimde kunti pe'i
12:53 < Ilmen> .i me'ei ciska cu kaipti tau lo pixra
12:54 < Ilmen> ba'a nai
12:55 < selpahi> ma melbi brivla
12:55 < durka42> ba'arcau
12:56 < Ilmen> la'a zo nonci'a na'e mapti .i lo lujvo pe zo'oi non ta'e co'e lu broda be no da li'u
12:56 < Ilmen> nonteci?
12:56 < selpahi> mi pu pensi zo barna .i ku'i mi co'a sanji lo nu lo ba'o te ciska pelji ku ji'a ka'e ba'arcau da'i
12:56 < Ilmen> te ciska be no da?
12:57 < durka42> ka'e ba'arcau xu
12:57 < Ilmen> zo skamanfo ji'a ka'e co'e
12:58 < selpahi> "This page of writing is full of stains. Do you have a copy that's stain free?"
12:58 < Ilmen> .i ku'i pe'i zo nonteci na mabla .i ma ni fegli fi do'o
12:58 < selpahi> li du'e ui nai
13:00 < durka42> ua
13:00 < selpahi> .i zo skamanfo zo'u lo boxfo poi  morna simsa lo zebra je ku'i nu'o te ciska cu zasti
13:00 < Ilmen> ju'o
13:00 < durka42> mi djica lo boxfo poi barna lo xinmo jenai lo ckafi
13:03 < selpahi> malfu'a fa lo nu zo nu'o ji'a na prane mapti .i ka'e tcica .i mu'a lo rokpisterci'a poi ba'o te ciska ka'e se lumci ja'e lo nu di'a kunti jo'a cu'i
13:03 < selpahi> .i ja'o na nu'o te ciska
13:03 < selpahi> .i ku'i kunti jo'a cu'i
13:03 < Ilmen> ci'anti .i ciska kunti
13:04 < Ilmen> .u'i
13:04 < selpahi> mablyme'a ro lo prula'i
13:04 < durka42> then you need ci'anxra as well
13:04 < Ilmen> ŭa nai
13:04 < Ilmen> ka'e ciska lo pixra ke'u
13:05 < durka42> je'e
13:05 < Ilmen> .i zo ciska na srana fe po'o lo lerpoi
13:05 < Ilmen> ba'a nai
13:05 < Ilmen> en: ciska
13:05 < mensi> ciska = x1 inscribes/writes x2 on display/storage medium x3 with writing implement x4; x1 is a scribe. | Also x3 writing
13:05 < mensi> surface.  See also papri, penbi, pinsi, tcidu, xatra, pixra, prina, finti for 'author' or specific authorial works,
13:05 < mensi> barna, pinka. | officialdata
13:06 < Ilmen> xmm do'e ma doi mi mi xusyga'e lo nu su da xusra lodu zo ciska mapti lo si'o xraci'a
13:06 < selpahi> la'a lo lojbo ve skicu pe la .xorxes.
13:06 < durka42> jbo:ciska
13:06 < durka42> la mensi ba spuda ca lo bavlamdei
13:06 < mensi> ciska = x1 gasnu lo nu x2 noi na'o se smuni ja sinxa cu barna ja ba'armo'a x3
13:07 < Ilmen> en: xraci'a
13:07 < mensi> xraci'a [< pixra ciska ≈ Picture write] = c1=p3 draws picture c2=p1 on medium c3=p4 with implement c4 depicting p2. | Cf.
13:07 < mensi>  pixra, ciska, xraselci'a, xratai, kacmyxra, kacmyterxra, kacmyxragau, kacmyxrazu'e.  |
13:07 < mensi> totus
13:07 < durka42> uasai zo barna
13:09 < Ilmen> pe'i zo ciska joi zo kunti joi zo no joi zo claxu cu kaipti lo ka te jupyzba
13:10 < Ilmen> .i ku'i na'e frili fa lo ka jupyzba lo mletce
13:10 < selpahi> «lu [...] pa'a lo ci'anti pergamena li'u»
13:15 < selpahi> xu mansa .i la'a mansa mi
13:16 < Ilmen> pe'i go'i mi
13:16 < selpahi> .i mi ji do ba jmina zo ci'anti la jbovlaste
13:16 < Ilmen> mi zifre lo ka jmina
13:16 < Ilmen> .i .e'e pei
13:16 < selpahi> go'i ra'o
13:16 < Ilmen> .i ce'u te ciska no da no de
13:16 < Ilmen> si
13:16 < Ilmen> si
13:17 < Ilmen> su'o de
13:17 < selpahi> .i sa'u lo jmina cu .y crepu lo .y ka lo drata cu manci lo banli se finti be ce'u
13:17 < selpahi> :P
13:17 < Ilmen> .u'i
13:17 < selpahi> .i jalge fa lo nu ro da djica lo nu da jmina
13:18 < Ilmen> mi jmina .ai
13:19 < Ilmen> .i xu su da drata brivo je cu jai se djica
13:19 < selpahi> .i ie pei na banzu fa tau lu te ciska no da su'o de li'u .i xu lo vacri je lo xamsi je lo sidbo cu ci'anti ni'i lo du'u no da su'o de ciska
13:19 < mensi> mi tugni i ie mi tugni
13:19 < selpahi> .i .ei lo ci'anti cu se sefta su'o da
13:20 < selpahi> $x_1$ noi ke'a se sefta cu li'o
13:20 < selpahi> .i ja'a ku so'o drata brivla cu jai se djica
13:21 < Ilmen> lu $x_1$ ka'e te ciska su'o da su'o de gi'e ku'i ca'a te ciska na ku su'o da su'o de li'u
13:22 < selpahi> .i'a ru'e .i xu na ku lo ka ciska cu ka punji .i ku'i lo si'o ci'anti cu srana lo ba'e jalge be lo nu ciska
13:23 < selpahi> .i .e'u jmina su pu zei cmavo ja su za'o zei cmavo
13:23 < Ilmen> la'a lu ka'e fa'u ca'a ja'a fa'u na te ciska li'u tordu zmadu
13:23 < Ilmen> .u'i
13:23 < selpahi> .u'i
13:24 < selpahi> mi zo'u zo zi'o simsa sai lu su'o da li'u pe lo do smuvelski
13:25 < selpahi> .i na vajni .i ta'i ma cikre lo do smuvelcki .i zo pu na jai banzu
13:25 < Ilmen> exp: ka'e je na broda
13:25 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "b" found.
13:25 < Ilmen> exp: ka'e ku je na ku
13:25 < mensi> ([{ka'e ku} {je <na ku>}] VAU)
13:25 < Ilmen> mabla
13:27 < selpahi> .i xu zo viska pagbu .i ka'e te ciska gi'e ca'o se cpana no cinta ja co'e poi se viska
13:28 < selpahi> .i .u'i zanfu'a mi fa lo nu do kau je nai mi jmina zo ci'anti
13:30 < Ilmen> mo'u jmina lo lojbo velski
13:31 < selpahi> xu do jimpe lo du'u mi ma kau pante
13:31 < Ilmen> .i xŋŋ mi kucli .i xu lo ve pixra cu ve vreji
13:31 < Ilmen> zo nonvei na na ka'e mapti ju'o cu'i
13:32 < selpahi> la'a .i ju'o su'o ve pixra cu ve vreji
13:35 < _mukti_> The definition and usage of pensi seem to be at odds.
13:35 < _mukti_> {pensi lo du'u} is frequent
13:36 < Ilmen> sa'u va'o lo nu su'o da ciska fo lo na ka'e se viska to mu'a blabi ja skacau xinmo toi zo'u lo dacti cu za'o simlu lo ka na te ciska .i simsa lo nu lo prenu cu viska lo rutni spati gi'e xusra lodu lo spati cu zvati kei fau lo nu fliba loka ganse lonu rutni
13:36 < selpahi> Lots of malgli usage of pensi
13:36 < _mukti_> en: pensi
13:36 < mensi> pensi = x1 thinks/considers/cogitates/reasons/is pensive about/reflects upon subject/concept x2. | Also: x1 is
13:36 < mensi> thoughtful (one sense); x2 is mental (one sense)/intellectual (one sense) (= selpei).  See also cmavo list pe'i, jijnu,
13:36 < mensi> menli, morji, sidbo, jinvi, se nabmi, minra, lanli, besna, saske, skami. | officialdata
13:36 < selpahi> je'e la .ilmen.
13:36 < _mukti_> If by malgli you mean "think about", it seems to be encouraged by the official definition.
13:37 < _mukti_> Intuitively, I expect {pensi} to have a similar structure to {jinvi}, at least the first three places
13:37 < _mukti_> But instead, it seems to fuse jinvi2 and jinvi3 into pensi2
13:37 < selpahi> .i ku'i xu do jimpe fi lo drata se xusra be mi .i lo na ci'anti boxfo na bi'ai ca'o te ciska .i ku'i lo do smuvelcki cu curmi lo nu ci'anti
13:37 < selpahi> ua pei
13:38 < selpahi> No, the opposite is what I mean.
13:38 < selpahi> It means "think about X", not "think that X"
13:38 < selpahi> They often use {pensi} when they mean {jinvi}
13:38 < _mukti_> ua
13:39 < _mukti_> I just noticed jinvi also has the gloss "think"
13:42 < Ilmen> ŭa nai go'oi curmi
13:43 < selpahi> lo do smuvelcki zo'u lo nu mi skicu lo na ci'anti boxfo lo ka ci'anti cu drani
13:43 < selpahi> fo lo ka *
13:43 < Ilmen> ŭa
13:44 < selpahi> ki'u lo nu na ba'e ca'o te ciska
13:44 < selpahi> .i ku'i pu te ciska
13:49 < Ilmen> zo ximcau ji'a cinri .i ku'i lo nu curmi lo nu lo linji ja gredile ja mo kau cu zvati cu selja'e lo nu nandu .i da'i ka'e terbri panra zo kunti joi zo jinsa
13:51 < Ilmen> kibro nabmi lifri .i xu lo selsku be mi be'o poi zo nandu pagbu cu mo'u se benji
13:51 < selpahi> go'i
13:51 < Ilmen> si cpacu
13:51 < _mukti_> How do {se xamgu} and {se prali} differ ?
13:51 < _mukti_> Both have a sense of "benefits"
13:53 < _mukti_> xamgu1 can be an event. prali3 must be.
13:53 < _mukti_> and prali1 has no analogue in xamgu
13:53 < _mukti_> oh, and xamgu3 is a "by standard" place, so I'm pretending it's not there
13:54 < Ilmen> X prali Y fi Z is similar to {lo nu Y ckaji X cu se xamgu Z}
13:54 < Ilmen> si'au
13:54 < _mukti_> Really?
13:55 < Ilmen> jbo: prali
13:55 < mensi> prali = x1 xamgu x2 gi'e jalge x3 | xamgu; jalge | xorxes
13:55 < Ilmen> .u'i
13:55 < _mukti_> lo rupnu be li panono cu prali mi lo nu mi gunka
13:56 < Ilmen> loka cpacu lo rupnu
13:56 < Ilmen> ba'a
13:56 < _mukti_> lo nu mi ckaji lo rupnu be li panono cu se xamgu lo nu mi gunka
13:56 < Ilmen> .i lo ka jerna
13:57 < _mukti_> Hmm... Maybe if prali1 were an event ... but the current definition doesn't read that way to me
13:58 < _mukti_> And the lojban definition allows it, since xamgu1 is weird in admitting both events and non-events
13:59 < _mukti_> So keeping with the idea of an event in prali1... and converting it to a property ... lo nu mi ckaji lo ka cpacu lo rupnu be li panono cu se xamgu lo nu mi gunka ...
14:00 < _mukti_> Now we've got surprising (to me at least) semantics for xamgu
14:00 < _mukti_> The idea that the event is the beneficiary?
14:00 < Ilmen> doi la selpa'i .i ma traji loka do nelci ku lo nu da'i zo ci'anti cu simsa zo ximcau to no skari morna cu pagbu .i se ni'i bo no linji ja gredile ja mo kau cu co'e toi kei jo'u lo nu zo ci'anti cu terbri simsa zo kunti .e zo jinsa to mu'a ci'anti lo lerfu morna .enai lo linji toi
14:01 < Ilmen> .i ji'a lo midju pluta cu nu tersumei za'u da
14:01 < _mukti_> Although I think Augustine would assent to the idea that causation is good. :)
14:01 < _mukti_> s/Augustine/Aquinas/
14:01 < fenki> la'oi _mukti_ pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.Although I think Aquinas would assent to the idea that causation is good. :).zoi
14:02 < _mukti_> Confounding my Doctors.
14:02 < selpahi> doi la .ilmen. .i na birti .i .e'u ma'a facki ca lo nu pilno
14:03 < Ilmen> je'e .i'a
14:05 < Ilmen> lo nu do gunka cu selja'e lo nu do rupnu jerna noi xamgu do
14:05 < Ilmen> doi la mukti
14:09 < Ilmen> ni'o .ai mi spuda la .guskant. tau lo prenexo normale tarmi
14:35 < Ilmen> .i mulfau
14:37 < selpahi> mi viska
14:41 < Ilmen> .a'o mansa la .guskant.
14:43 < Ilmen> za'a mi fliba loka jmina lo ro moi toi zei lerfu kei soi nalvai
14:43 < selpahi> .u'i
14:57 < selpahi> ca'o ku pa pa valsi cu pagbu lo liste
14:59  * Ilmen ca'o tinju'i lo .albumza'o
15:00  * Ilmen zo'u la'a la'au ko cikna cu na'e ke tcika mapti .i ku'i za'a no cmima lu ko sipna li'u se cmene
15:00 < selpahi> .u'i
15:03 < selpahi> la'a ro mi'o ba zi co'a sipna .i ku'i mi ka'e visygau do lo se liste
15:04 < tsani> .i .oi .u'i JVS mrobi'o ba lo nu mi co'a se jaspu ku zi
15:05 < tsani> .i coi rodo
15:07 < selpahi> coi
15:07 < Ilmen> je'e .i .a'u mi liste tcidu
15:07 < Ilmen> da'i
15:08 < Ilmen> coi zdani be lo dilnu
15:08 < Ilmen> jo'u lo tarci
15:10 < selpahi> do ka'e pensi lo cmima be lo liste pu lo nu mi'o di'a casnu .i .a'o ca lo bavlamdei mi mo'u di'a kanro
15:10 < selpahi> .i liste fa di'e
15:10 < selpahi> crossbow      threaten      to go a few steps further (literally)      thorn (e.g. of a plant)      goods      corrupt (doing dishonest, illegal, or immoral things to gain money or power)      log (of wood)      ember      ban (e.g. a person from a place)      apparently      strain/burden ("x1 is a burden on x2")
15:14 < Ilmen> je'e
15:16 < Ilmen> zo'oi apparently zo'u ŭa nai ru'e zo si'au joi lu soi faumlu li'u mo .i zo'oi thorn zo'u .o'o xu za'o na pagbu lo jbobau vau .u'i
15:17 < Ilmen> .i .e'u zo spajesni ja zo spajesi
15:17 < selpahi> lo pa moi zo'u ra'u ru'e mi djica lo nu na ku ro srana be zoi gy. apparently .gy se fanva fu zo si'au ja zo simlu po'o .i ku'i ba casnu ca lo drata
15:18 < Ilmen> .i je'e .i lu soi se ganse li'u ji'a ka'e
15:18 < selpahi> ie lo simsa
15:18 < Ilmen> .i sa'u naku ro se ganse cu jetnu
15:18 < Ilmen> ja fasnu
15:20 < Ilmen> zo'oi goods zo'u mi da'i stidi zo xamgu si zo selpo'e
15:20 < Ilmen> .i ku'i ĭe ca lo mapti di'a
15:21 < selpahi> .i'o
15:21 < Ilmen> .i .ai mi ba zi co'u cikna .i .ai mi ba zi co'u cikna
15:21 < selpahi> .u'i
15:21 < selpahi> go'i ra'o
15:21 < selpahi> di'ai
15:22 < Ilmen> co'o :)
19:55 < tsani> .i zukte jo nai zukte .i no da ka troci
19:55 < _mukti_> coi la tsani
19:55 < tsani> coi
19:56 < tsani> .i zoi gy do or do not gy jai nandu co se fanva
19:56 < tsani> .i li'a lu zukte jo zukte li'u smudu'i .i ku'i ... no'e mansa
19:56 < tsani> ni'o do mo doi la mukti .i ma nuzba
19:57 < _mukti_> mi co'a jinvi lo du'u tcika fa lo ny bastygau la jbovlaste
19:57 < _mukti_> .i ba'a nai do pu co'a gunka tu'a lo basti
19:58 < _mukti_> (bastygau fi la jbovlaste)
19:59 < _mukti_> .i xu do co'a gunka
19:59 < _mukti_> s/co'a/ca'o
19:59 < fenki> la'oi _mukti_ pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi..i xu do ca'o gunka.zoi
20:03 < tsani> .i je'u mi na co'e .i mi pu troci .i ku'i .u'u binxo co zukcfu dukse
20:04 < _mukti_> je'e .i nandu
20:05 < tsani> .i ma ne lo nu basygau ku do se plate
20:05 < tsani> si platu
20:05 < _mukti_> .i mi co'a ru'e junri platu
20:05 < tsani> .i'e
20:06 < tsani> .i xu ba finti lo je'u cnino .iji favgau la vlasisku te zu'e lo nu kakne dunli JVS
20:07 < _mukti_> .i mi jinvi lo du'u pa mai zbasu zoi zoi API zoi
20:08 < _mukti_> .i ba bo cumki fa lo nu pilno zoi zoi interface zoi pe la vlasisku
20:10 < _mukti_> .i ji'a bo zbasu lo mulno cnino zoi zoi interface zoi poi ke'a se pilno fi lo nu finti jonai jai galfi lo valsi .e lo smuni
20:26  * nuzba @djeikyb: .@bgcarlisle I can imagine myself telling people that the #lojban word for "jet engine" literally means "fart propulsion device". [http://bit.ly/1HTI2F2]
22:30 <@rlpowell> Breaking things for a bit, sorry.
23:47 <@rlpowell> And breaking things again.
23:51 <@rlpowell> Fixed.
--- Day changed Mon Jul 27 2015
00:32  * nuzba @yutopp: lojbanの単語catraしか知らない [http://bit.ly/1KsZOzR]
01:04 < zipcpi> gleki: One thing in common with the words you jokingly suggested the other day, which I made Eulojban brivla, is that they all describe sensations/qualia, which is actually a category of words that Lojban might have trouble expressing
01:05 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: la kurtis cu djica lo nu lu li zo mlatu li'u gendra gi'e sinxa lo pa sumti i ja'o ei lu
01:05 < mensi> li cu broda li'u co'u skicu tu'a lo kunti ke namcu ja lerfu porsi | 2015-07-26T12:45:28.
01:05 < mensi> 384Z
01:05 < mensi> zipcpi: cu'u la'o gy.gleki.gy.: la guskant na djica lo nu zo xo'i cmavo zo go'oi iju'oi https://twitter.com/oka_iu_tcan/
01:05 < mensi> status/614416499105624064 | 2015-07-27T06:54:53.791Z
01:08 < zipcpi> As for Guskant not wanting xo'i in GOhOI... hm. I guess she does want to enforce the "only sumtcita" rule. That is also a valid position. I was only suggesting GOhOI for those either too lazy to program more selma'o, or who wish to not complicate grammar any further than it needs to be :p
01:11 < zipcpi> Yes, I've seen Curtis' suggestion for allowing strings in LI...LOhO. I'm not sure it's needed though... {mo'e} exists, and if we allowed VUhU-joi'i to be used like JOI (or even just moved it to JOI) it'd work great
01:12 < zipcpi> exp: zo gerku joi'i zo zdani
01:12 < mensi> ([{zo gerku} {joi'i <zo zdani>}] VAU)
01:12 < zipcpi> off: zo gerku vu'u zo zdani
01:12 < mensi> SyntaxError: Expected [,] but "z" found.
01:14  * nuzba @yutopp: lojbanで文鳥はなんていうのかな [http://bit.ly/1I47aXu]
01:22 < zipcpi> Heck that's probably how I'm gonna use joi'i the most
01:29 < zipcpi> Guskant also did make RAhOI its own selma'o
01:29 < zipcpi> zantufa: ra'oi tce
01:29 < zantufa> ([ra'oi tce] VAU)
01:29 < zipcpi> zantufa ra'oi bu'a'a'a
01:29 < zipcpi> zantufa: ra'oi bu'a'a'a
01:29 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [oO] .i ku'i "a" cu se tolcri
01:29 < zipcpi> zantufa ra'oi nonlojbanword
01:30 < zipcpi> zantufa: ra'oi nonlojbanword
01:30 < zantufa> minajimpe: .i kanpe tu'a [,] .i ku'i "l" cu se tolcri
01:30 < zipcpi> So yeah, not in ZOhOI, only accepts rafsi
02:03 < gleki> quotes inside {li} will make {lo'o} almost unelidible
02:04 < gleki> ta'osai i think i just won't use neither {volve} nor {xruti} nor any other single brivla.
02:05 < gleki> {volve} is bad for portuguese speakers. others are either clash with existing gismu or even worse than {volve} in being confusing in mnemonics
02:05 < gleki> s/are//
02:05 < fenki> la'oi gleki pu djica lo ka cusku zoi zoi.{volve} is bad for portuguese speakers. others  either clash with existing gismu or even worse than {volve} in being confusing in mnemonics.zoi
02:11 <@rlpowell> gleki: Fixed vreji, and taught it to send email if it can't connect.
02:17 < gleki> rlpowell: will you restore lost logs?
02:22 <@rlpowell> Not as easy as it sounds; your logs are in a totally different format.
02:22 <@rlpowell> Well.  Not totally, but substantially.
02:22 <@rlpowell> And I don't have #jbosnu
02:22 <@rlpowell> Ah, but that's what the "other" folder is for, I suppose.