History: xoi

Source of version: 1 (current)

''du'eroi'' Too many times ''du'exoi'' Too much; too true ''le jai xoi'' = ''le jei''''noxoi'' = ''na'' ''This is most useful for digits ''du'e, rau, mo'a''. We need a way to access d/dt ''xoi'', to express increase/decrease of the bridi's truth value over time. --((xod))'' What ''selma'o'', if any, does it fall into? The current description makes it seem to me, at least, a bit vague. Could we get some full example bridi, too? :) (it seems like one of the more interesting experimental cmavo, fwiw) --((Jay Kominek|Jay)) ''selma'o ROI might be sufficient, since it's a parallel of roi.'' ''le xirma cu rauxoi blabi'' The horse is white enough. ''Now I am looking for values I can prepend to xoi to end up with an increasing/decreasing tense, such that'' ''le xirma cu daxoi blabi'' The horse is increasingly white. ''I considered and rejected ma'u and ni'u. --((xod))'' Perhaps you need ''xe'u'' alongside ''xoi'' as ''re'u'' is to ''roi''. Then you'd have ''piroxe'u'' = ''mo'u'' completion ''piso'uxe'u'' = ''co'a'' starting ''pidu'exe'u'' = ''za'o'' ''piza'uxe'u'' increasingly ''pimuxe'u'' half-way there However, I would suggest using something other than ''xoi'' and ''xe'u'', as they may sound too similar to ''roi'' and ''re'u''. --((xorxes)) On further thought, we may even be able to use ''roi'' and ''re'u'' themselves for this. With integers, they indicate number of times. With fractionals, they indicate how much of a time it really is (to what extent the horse is white): ''le xirma pirauroi blabi''The horse is white enough. ''le xirma piso'uroi blabi''The horse is barely white. ''le xirma piza'ure'u blabi''The horse is increasingly white. --((xorxes)) *I don't see why ''roi'' should get a new meaning with a fraction. ''le xirma pirauroi blabi'' is quite clearly means ''The horse is white enough of the time.'' -- ((Adam)) **Enough of __one__ time, but less than one time, not quite one time. I don't think the English idioms "most of the time", "some of the time", etc. translate with ''roi'', or do they? --((xorxes)) * Right, of course. ''Enough of the time'' is simply ''rauroi'', ''most of the time'' is ''so'eroi''. ''pirauroi'' refers to a portion of a time, but it still refers to a time/occurence and not amount of truth. I'm not sure what a portion of a time means. **Who said that ''roi'' refers to time? It refers to instances. I think that fractional instances is at least one possible reading of fractional "amount of truth". Not quite one instance but not quite no instances either.--((xorxes)) ***One of the senses of ''time'' in English is ''instance'' or ''occurence''. What is a fraction of a instance? Your can define how much an instance is arbitrarily most of the time, so how can you have a fraction of an instance? I don't think it has anything to do with "amount of truth". The horse could be mostly white or white enough all of the time/always. --((Adam)) ****We should not give to ''roi'' both senses of the word "time". How long the horse is white is a different question from how many times it is white. ''roi'' is about the number of times, not about the length of time. "All of the time/always" is ''ze'e'', it is not any ''roi''. A fraction of an instance is not well defined, I agree. One way of dealing with it is to relate it to length of time, specify that an instance must take a certain amount of time, and if the situation at hand takes less than that then you say that's a fractional instance. For example, if for a horse to be white one instance is the life of the horse, then you might say that it is white half of an instance if for some reason it is white only half of its life. (That is also one possible interpretation of saying that the truth value of "the horse is white" is 0.5, isn't it? Among many other possibilities.) But saying that the horse is white "less than one time" does not have to mean that it is white for a shorter period of time than some arbitrary unit. It may have nothing to do with length of time. It may be that it doesn't amount to one time for some other reason than not enough time. --((xorxes)) ---- Some who liked the xoi idea (such as ((Jordan DeLong|myself))), believe that it is superseded by the cmavo ((va'e)) (which has the additional benefit of being a member of MOI instead of ROI, and of course of being part of the ((baseline))). ((va'e)) was left out of the cmavo liste, but appeared in the book, which lead to it being essentially unused. *** See also ((JAhA + CAI)) for a write-up of an old proposal that covers some but far from all of the ground covered by ''((va'e))'' and ''xoi''. --((And)) * ''On IRC I, ((xod)), already explained to you why I prefer ROI to MOI: Its tense-ness can move it out of the selbri, and it can also be a sumtcita. I don't recall any reasons MOI is better than ROI.'' ** Yes, I just wanted to get it on the wiki. The preference of MOI is because MOI makes a full brivla, which is benefitial here: you can use a PA+va'e alone in a selbri without needing a co'e (there's a few of these types on the ((va'e)) page), which allows for simple description as are often used with moi (le pamoi, le du'eva'e, etc). The only downside to the brivla approach is that you need to remember to put in a "ke" if you have a multi-part tertau on the right hand side. Also I like the moi-style place structures with a x3 place when used with subjective numbers: ''mi du'eva'e be fi lenu mi dansu be'o tatpi''. The sumtcita point is interesting however; what would xoi mean as a sumtcita? --mi'e ((.djorden.))