History: gadri

Source of version: 2

__gadri__ -- articles/descriptors This section is currently outdated following the passing (but not the implementation) of the gadri proposal, see ((BPFK Section: gadri|BPFK Section: gadri)) and ((How to use xorlo|How to use xorlo)) for more information. Lojban gadri are potentially tricky at first. This is an attempt to explain the exact differences between them all in one place. The main interest here is the difference between the lo-family and le-family, and to a lesser extent the differences between mass, set, and individual; the other articles are mentioned here as well for completeness however. First, a list of gadri, with their implicit ((quantifiers)): -------- __individual__ __mass__ __set__ __named__ ro __la__ su'o pisu'o __lai__ su'o piro __la'i__ su'o __described__ ro __le__ su'o pisu'o __lei__ su'o piro __le'i__ su'o __idealized__ su'o __lo__ ro pisu'o __loi__ ro piro __lo'i__ ro ro __le'e__ su'o the stereotypical (similar to ''le'' family) su'o __lo'e__ ro the typical (similar to ''lo'' family) su'o __li__ the number su'o __me'o__ the mexso -------- There are three main categories of articles, and three main types. The categories are "Names" (''la'', ''lai'' and ''la'i''), "Descriptions" (''le'', ''lei'' and ''le'i''), and "Idealizations" (''lo'', ''loi'', ''lo'i''). __Names__ -- Articles in the ''la'' family refer to something by name. The name need not have anything to do with what the referent actually is, and may frequently be lojbanizations of names in other languages (For example, the lojbanization of my name is "djorden.", and thus I am referred to via "la djorden."). __Descriptions__ -- A lojban speaker uses description articles of the ''le'' family when they are wishing to convey information about a thing (group of things, etc) which they have in mind. The gadri introduces a description, which need not be related to what the thing actually is (as if the speaker could determine that anyway). For this reason the ''le'' family of gadri are frequently compared to the English definite article "the". I think this is misleading because the ''le'' family is actually a bit broader than "the". For example: when an English speaker starts a story about a man, the first time the man appears he will be described as "a man", and from then on as "the man". In lojban, because the speaker is referring to a particular man she has in mind, the first appearance would be tagged with ''le''. __Idealizations__ -- The ''lo'' family of articles are easily the most confusing to new speakers (or at least, they were to me). The standard wording of their meaning is "that which really is", which reflects the fact that unlike the other two main groups of articles they do not simply describe something, they claim it truly is that thing. However, this is not the most important difference: the ''lo'' articles have a default implicit inner quantifier of "ro" (all). So for example, the sumti phrase ''lo gerku'' refers to one or more of all the things which are dogs. The dogs are referred to indefinitely; meaning, the speaker does not have particular dogs in mind, but is instead talking about some of all the dogs. The confusion which can arise from this distinction is what sometimes leads new speakers to misuse the ''lo'' family by modifying the inner quantifiers. For example, ''lo re gerku'' does not mean "Some of those two which really are dogs" in the way the user probably intended. Instead, it indicates that there are only two things in existence which really are dogs. A good general rule is that if you are modifying the inner quantifier of a gadri in the ''lo'' family, think twice about it, as they are rarely useful with inner quantifiers other than "ro". ----- There are also three main forms for each category of gadri. Individuals, masses, and sets. Do not confuse these with quantification -- a mass does not mean there is necessarily more than one, and (more importantly) an individual does not mean there is only one. Rather, this stuff explains in what manner claims are being made about a sumti. The differences between masses and individuals is most easily explained with an example: le gerku cu mrobi'o lei gerku cu mrobi'o The first of these says "The dog(s) became dead", meaning that each of them died individually. The second also says that "The dog(s) became dead", but talks about them as a mass: in order for the bridi to be true, only one of the dogs need actually have died. A mass has the union of qualities of all of its members. This means that it is possible to say seemingly contradictory things using mass descriptors, such: lei gerku cu morsi gi'e jmive which says that "The dog(s) are dead and alive". The bridi is true if at least one of the members of the mass is dead AND at least one of the members is alive. ---- The above is not how I understand masses. "A mass has the union of qualities of all of its members" is not how it works. A mass has many properties that none of its members have, and lacks many properties that each or some of its members have. It also shares __some__ properties with all or some of its members, but definitely not all of their properties. Examples: ''le gerku cu citka pa jipci'' Each of the dogs eats one chicken. ''lei gerku cu citka mu jipci'' The dogs (together) eat five chicken. If each of five dogs eats one chicken, then it is false that the five dogs together eat one chicken. Therefore the property of each member ("eats one chicken") is not inherited by the mass. --((xorxes)) * Why isn't that covered by unioning their properties? If each of the 5 dogs ate one chicken, then mass has the qualities {ate chicken1;ate chicken2;ate chicken3;...}. ''lei gerku cu citka le mu jipci'' is just a reduction of that, no? That said, if you have a better wording for the above, feel free to change it and remove this discussion. -- mi'e ((Jordan DeLong|.djorden.)) ** Ahh, now that I re-read I see your point. The mass doesn't inheirit the quality of eating one chicken. I'll think of a better way to word it and change it, unless someone else does first. -- mi'e ((Jordan DeLong|.djorden.)) ***The traditional wording is "has the sum of the properties of its members" with the understanding that "sum" includes literal sums of numerical properties, resultants of joint activities ("the team ((a mass)) won the game" or "the three boys carried the piano"), logical sums (disjunctions -- your "unions"), and an open-ended range of other compoundings. pc ---- (( I'll put stuff about about sets in here later, unless someone beats me to it )).

History

Enable pagination rows per page

HTML diff Side-by-side diff Side-by-side diff by characters Inline diff Inline diff by characters Full side-by-side diff Full side-by-side diff by characters Full inline diff Full inline diff by characters Unified diff Side-by-side view HTML diff Side-by-side diff Advanced

Information	Version
Tue 02 of Mar, 2010 09:29 GMT 30Seconds from 70.66.215.185 split off discussion	3
Tue 02 of Mar, 2010 08:50 GMT 30Seconds from 70.66.215.185	2
Fri 30 of Nov, 2001 12:31 GMT admin from admin created from phpwiki import	1

Select action to perform with checked... Remove OK