Lojban In General

Lojban In General


5/6%

posts: 324

lo nu pilno lo kramu .e lo gutci peseba'i lo treci'e cu rinka lo nu srera la'u
li mufi'uxace'i
The context is the Rational Method, a method for computing the amount of
runoff in a storm. In the US, customarily, the area is in acres, the rainfall
is in inches per hour, and the runoff is in cubic feet per second. This
bizarre combination of units happens to be off by less than 1%, to be exact,
a ratio of 121/120. Is "mufi'uxace'i" correct? Or is it 83+1/3?

Pierre
--
lo ponse be lo mruli po'o cu ga'ezga roda lo ka dinko


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

posts: 350
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:

>
> lo nu pilno lo kramu .e lo gutci peseba'i lo treci'e cu rinka lo nu srera la'u
> li mufi'uxace'i
> The context is the Rational Method, a method for computing the amount of
> runoff in a storm. In the US, customarily, the area is in acres, the rainfall
> is in inches per hour, and the runoff is in cubic feet per second. This
> bizarre combination of units happens to be off by less than 1%, to be exact,
> a ratio of 121/120. Is "mufi'uxace'i" correct? Or is it 83+1/3?
>
> Pierre

  I'd say that was correct.  In the absence of  vei/ve'o, it should be
left to right grouping

--gy


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

posts: 324

On Tuesday 01 December 2009 10:08:40 Michael Turniansky wrote:
>   I'd say that was correct.  In the absence of  vei/ve'o, it should be
> left to right grouping

None of "mu fi'u xa ce'i" is an operator, so that's irrelevant. As far as the
grammar is concerned, "mufi'uxace'i" is the same as "parecivo"
or "paici'ino'otu'o".

Pierre
--
li fi'u vu'u fi'u fi'u du li pa


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.

posts: 350
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu> wrote:

> On Tuesday 01 December 2009 10:08:40 Michael Turniansky wrote:
>>   I'd say that was correct.  In the absence of  vei/ve'o, it should be
>> left to right grouping
>
> None of "mu fi'u xa ce'i" is an operator, so that's irrelevant. As far as the
> grammar is concerned, "mufi'uxace'i" is the same as "parecivo"
> or "paici'ino'otu'o".
>
> Pierre
> --
> li fi'u vu'u fi'u fi'u du li pa


Fair point. As CLL says, ref'iuze "is the name of the number
two-sevenths; it is not the same as ``the result of 2 divided by 7''
in Lojban, although numerically these two are equal." (it also laters
says that 1/2 is not the same as 3/6. So as soon as you tell me what
paici'ino'otu'o means unambiguously, I"ll tell you what mufi'uxace'i
means... It seems to me that if you wanted it to evaluate to 5/(6%),
you should use mu fi'u {no} pi no xa

--gejyspa


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.