What is the x3 of tubnu?

[Robin Lee Powell]

tubnu -tu'u-

x1 is a length of tubing/pipe/hollow cylinder [shape/form] of
material x2, hollow of material x3.

Also tube, sleeve, leg, hose, (adjective:) tubular. See also kevna,
canlu.

--

So is the x3 stuff that *isn't* in the tube? If so, why have it?

-Robin

--
http://singinst.org/ : Our last, best hope for a fantastic future.
.i ko na cpedu lo nu stidi vau loi jbopre .i danfu lu na go'i li'u .e
lu go'i li'u .i ji'a go'i lu na'e go'i li'u .e lu go'i na'i li'u .e
lu no'e go'i li'u .e lu to'e go'i li'u .e lu lo mamta be do cu sofybakni li'u

[Jonathan Jones]

I think it's missing a comma: "... hollow, of material x3".

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

[Craig Daniel]

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it's missing a comma: "... hollow, of material x3".

I disagree, since that makes x2=x3.

I suspect it's intended to be a place that is never filled but allows
you to describe what has been bored out as lo te tubnu, but this
doesn't actually seem like an especially useful thing to have done so
perhaps it is something subtler that I'm not seeing.

- mi'e .kreig.

[Jonathan Jones]

Ah, yes. I must have glossed over the x2 bit. I thought it was something else. In that case, I would suppose that the x3 is what is currently occupying the hollow region of the tube, such as water in plumbing, similar to the x2 of botpi. Further, I would guess that the reason for the awkwardness of its phrasing is due to the uncommonness of the concept attempting to be expressed in English.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.

[Robin Lee Powell]

That's what would be *useful*, but in that case you'd just say
"filled with x3", or perhaps "for being filled with x3".

So many wording problems in the gismu list. -_-

-Robin

[Jonathan Jones]

Agreed.

[Michael Turniansky]

  I had actually asked that question on the list back on 2/22/08:

preti
.i ma tertu'u to te tubnu toi
.i ri du da poi ca'a nenri lo tubnu gi'i pu se vimcu fi lo tubnu

 

 Both xorxes and selckiku agreed at the time the asnwer was "gi'u"

      --gejyspa

[Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG]

Michael Turniansky wrote:
> I had actually asked that question on the list back on 2/22/08:
>
> preti
> .i ma tertu'u to te tubnu toi
> .i ri du da poi ca'a nenri lo tubnu gi'i pu se vimcu fi lo tubnu
>
>
> Both xorxes and selckiku agreed at the time the asnwer was "gi'u"
> --gejyspa
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 1:12 AM, Jonathan Jones <eye...@gmail.com
> <mailto:eye...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Agreed.
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Robin Lee Powell

> <rlpo...@digitalkingdom.org <mailto:rlpo...@digitalkingdom.org>>

> wrote:
>
> That's what would be *useful*, but in that case you'd just say
> "filled with x3", or perhaps "for being filled with x3".
>
> So many wording problems in the gismu list. -_-
>
> -Robin
>
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 07:54:29PM -0600, Jonathan Jones wrote:
> > Ah, yes. I must have glossed over the x2 bit. I thought it
> was something
> > else. In that case, I would suppose that the x3 is what is
> currently
> > occupying the hollow region of the tube, such as water in
> plumbing, similar
> > to the x2 of botpi. Further, I would guess that the reason
> for the
> > awkwardness of its phrasing is due to the uncommonness of the
> concept
> > attempting to be expressed in English.

Yes.

It is the material that currently comprises the hollow/interior/filling,
usually air or water as the concept usually is used in English. English
talks of a tube or pipe as being "filled with" some material, suggesting
that the interior was not part of the tube, but rather that the tube was
a container of a sort. There probably should be an alternate wording
that matches the container version of the concept (but in the days when
the gismu list was first written, a primary purpose was to support
LogFlash, and hence character count was critical).

I was trying to word it to obtain a more generalized concept - one that
would allow us to consider an insulated wire to be a tube or insulation
with a copper (or other conductor) as the filling (or alternatively, the
electric current might be considered the "filling", though this is
stretching the concept). I think that there were some other related
concepts that we were trying to include as well, but they don't come to
mind.
--
Bob LeChevalier loj...@lojban.org www.lojban.org
President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.

[gleki]

The concept might be useful.

Imagine that I have a metallic pipe in my house for water.

I say that it's "jinme tubnu" and "djacu tubnu".

With 3 places it seems quite convenient to say tubnu lo jinme lo djacu

But needless to say that most places in one given gismu can be safely replaced with several distinct predicates.

[djandus]

On Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:22:58 AM UTC-5, lojbab wrote:

I was trying to word it to obtain a more generalized concept - one that
would allow us to consider an insulated wire to be a tube or insulation
with a copper (or other conductor) as the filling (or alternatively, the
electric current might be considered the "filling", though this is
stretching the concept).

I kind of like this idea -- and I can see how it applies to the current definition, unedited. (That is, "hollow" can be a noun referring to the hollow space itself.) The definition should definitely be reworded, though. How about:

x1 is a length of tubing/pipe/hollow cylinder [shape/form] of outer material x2, of inner material x3. 

[Jacob Errington]

I think that Bob's definition makes {tubnu} much more useful.

As for a rewording, why not something like:

x1 is a length of tubing/pipe/hollow cylinder [shape/form] of outer material x2, with contents/containing x3. 

mu'o mi'e la tsani

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/-OCypQmGyX4J.

[Matt Arnold]

+1 to Jacob's version, "contents/containing". "Inner material x3"
could be construed to mean the material of the tube's interior
surface. "Hollow of x3" implies the material that was carved out in
order to form the tube.

-Eppcott

[Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG]

Jacob Errington wrote:
> I think that Bob's definition makes {tubnu} much more useful.
> As for a rewording, why not something like:
> x1 is a length of tubing/pipe/hollow cylinder [shape/form]
> of outer material x2, with contents/containing x3.

That is the "container" wording that I was trying to avoid, but I don't
really have a problem with it.

lojbab

[Jacob Errington]

Well, even that wording isn't really so bad at all. I mean -- what is a pipe? It's essentially a "transient container" open on both ends, isn't it?

mu'o mi'e la tsani

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.

To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG]

Jacob Errington wrote:
> Well, even that wording isn't really so bad at all. I mean -- what is a
> pipe? It's essentially a "transient container" open on both ends, isn't it?

A container is implicitly defined by its function (to contain its
contents). tubnu and certain other words are shapes or forms - the
function may follow from the form, but the essential concept is the form
and not the function.

You'll find that the wording of a lot of gismu make reference to the
form/function dichotomy - something we thought was of fundamental
semantic importance back when we defined the place structures.

[Joe Anderson]

On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG <loj...@lojban.org> wrote:

Jacob Errington wrote:

Well, even that wording isn't really so bad at all. I mean -- what is a pipe? It's essentially a "transient container" open on both ends, isn't it?

A container is implicitly defined by its function (to contain its contents).  tubnu and certain other words are shapes or forms - the function may follow from the form, but the essential concept is the form  and not the function.

You'll find that the wording of a lot of gismu make reference to the form/function dichotomy - something we thought was of fundamental semantic importance back when we defined the place structures.

I noticed that in some of the definitions, comparing {kabri}, {tansi}, {tanxe} to {kurfa}, {cukla}, {slanu}.

I remember rather liking how versatile they were because of the distinction, like using {slanu kabri} for most cups or mugs, while using the same root to build lujvo like {ctikabri}. It really creates a different class of words that are surprisingly specific in definition compared to cup/bowl/etc. (as in, do you call a bowl a bowl because it is used for soup or because it is rounded?)

So, defining {tubnu} becomes a matter of whether we want it to be a shape/form definition or functional. If it's a shape/form definition, I see the functional version being something like {benji tubnu} for pipe. If it's a functional definition, I see {kevna slanu} being the shape/form equivalent. Just looking at those options, I'm kind of in favor of using tubnu functionally, as a container, while using {kevna} in general to express shape/forms that have interiors. (Are there any other shape/form words that have two materials? I don't recall having seen one.)

Additionally, I feel that the current choice of psuedo-glosses is a functional set, not a shape/form set. It's left ambiguous as to whether it has to be a circular cylinder or if it could have any shape of cross-section, so long as it "carries" or "contains" things like a tube/pipe would. For that matter, it's ambiguous whether {slanu} has the math or intuitive definition of cylinder. (The intuitive definition says it should have a circular cross-section, some math definitions merely require the cross-section to be uniform.) This is relevant for discussing things like {slanu kabri} (above) and {damtu'u} (below). In the former, I'm trying to use {slanu} to emphasize the circular cross-section shape, but in {damtu'u}, the shape merely has to carry fluid, lending to a functional definition.

Also note that we have the lujvo {jabytu'u}, {damtu'u}, {moltu'u}, {tu'urbirka} as dependencies. (Anyone see any others?) They all seem to lend themselves more to the functional definition, though I'm not sure about {jabytu'u}.

All in all, at the start of this email I was pretty indifferent, but looking around the definitions, I really want {tubnu} to have a more well-defined functional definition, taking dependencies into account, and I want {slanu} to be clear as to it's cross-section. I almost think it's enough to warrant another sumti place for the shape of cross-section, defaulting to circular, similar in nature to the x3 spot of {kurfa}. What do others think?