[Oz] {ji'i}

[iesk]

Hello Selpa'i,

do you use {ji'i} in a sense different from what CLL has?

I don't know the English source text, but from context it seems implausible that there are 'ca. 34 chairs' ('30-and-circa-4 chairs') in the farm house, which is how I normally understand {lo ci ji'i vo stizu}.

Does {ci ji'i vo} mean 'three to four' or something like that in the Oz text? If so, could you explain if that is the usual meaning of {ji'i} (in which case I have been misunderstanding CLL) or a deviant usage?

Thank you very much!

[.arpis.]

According to http://dag.github.io/cll/18/9/

If “ji'i” appears in the middle of a number, all the digits following it are approximate.

That is to say that {ci ji'i vo} means "about 34 (and I'm pretty sure about the "30" part)".

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
mu'o mi'e .arpis.

[iesk]

Le dimanche 12 janvier 2014 18:37:10 UTC+1, .arpis. a écrit :

According to http://dag.github.io/cll/18/9/

If “ji'i” appears in the middle of a number, all the digits following it are approximate.

That is to say that {ci ji'i vo} means "about 34 (and I'm pretty sure about the "30" part)".

Well, yes, that is what I said. Thank you for linking the relevant section. (I was reading and commenting on the translation while travelling yesterday and had no comfortable web access, and no red book at hand.)

In the meantime I have located the English text on the net. It says 'three or four chairs' there <http://www.gutenberg.org/files/55/55-h/55-h.htm#chap01>.

So Selpa'i does use {ji'i} in a peculiar way. (Systematically, I think, there is at least one similar occurence later in the text.) Is this Selpa'i's innovation, or where does it come from, and how does it work? There is a link titled 'ji'i ?' at <http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+Inexact+Numbers> (near the bottom of the page), but it doesn't work for some reason.

 

[selpa'i]

la .iesk. cu cusku di'e
> Hello Selpa'i,

Hello.

> do you use {ji'i} in a sense different from what CLL has?

Yes, slightly.

> I don't know the English source text, but from context it seems
> implausible that there are 'ca. 34 chairs' ('30-and-circa-4 chairs')
> in the farm house, which is how I normally understand {lo ci ji'i vo
> stizu}.
>
> Does {ci ji'i vo} mean 'three to four' or something like that in the
> Oz text? If so, could you explain if that is the usual meaning of
> {ji'i} (in which case I have been misunderstanding CLL) or a deviant
> usage?

The way I use {ji'i} (and I don't want to take credit for something
xorxes has been doing before me), {ci ji'i vo} means "three or four" as
in a number that's somewhere around 3 and 4. The way in which this
differs from CLL is that I treat {ji'i} like {su'o} et al. in that it
breaks up number strings. For example:

(1a) su'o ci su'e mu
"at least three at most five"

This is a number made up of two parts: {su'o ci} and {su'e mu},
implicitly connected by {.e}, so (1a) is the same as (1b):

(1b) vei su'o ci .e su'o mu
"at least three and at most five"

(The {vei} will hopefully become unecessary soon)

Another example, using {ro}:

(2) ro ci lo gerku
"all three of the dogs"

And (2a) is again the same as (2b):

(2b) vei ro .e ci lo gerku
"all of the dogs and three of the dogs"

(Since Lojban quantifiers are exact, this entails that {ro} equals {ci}.)

So, having multiple number strings adjacent to each other means the same
as connecting them with {.e}, except when {.e} is not applicable, in
which case it is {.a}.

Now, the CLL wants {ji'i} to appear as a normal digit inside a larger
number, but I agree with xorxes that this is confusing. Parsing numbers
on the fly is already difficult, because you need to hear up to three
digits before you know where they all go and unlike {su'o} et al.,
{ji'i} doesn't break up the number grouping, which makes it even harder
to parse. So I like to use {ji'i} more like {su'o}/{za'u}/{su'e}/{me'i}/...

{ci ji'i vo} is actually a shortcut for (3):

(3) ji'i ci ji'i vo
"about three [and] about four"
"somewhere around three or four"

With an implicit {.e} connecting them.

You may ask how to get the CLL meanings of {ci ji'i vo}. My answer to
that question is to use {su'i}:

(4) vei ci no su'i ji'i vo
"[exactly] thirty plus approximately four"

(again, the {vei} is just as unnecessary as the {ku} in {ku joi} was)

So the CLL meaning is by no means inaccessible, while {ji'i} becomes
more usable and numbers become saner to humans.

mi'e la selpa'i mu'o

[Jorge Llambías]

On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 4:08 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:

The way I use {ji'i} (and I don't want to take credit for something xorxes has been doing before me), {ci ji'i vo} means "three or four" as in a number that's somewhere around 3 and 4. 

I remember what was probably my first use of "ji'i", in this translation:

http://nuzban.wiw.org/archive/9309/msg00498.html

more than 20 years ago (ouch!). That was before the CLL was published, so I wasn't disobeying it when I used "cinoji'ivono" for "thirty or forty". I don't think I remember ever seeing it actually used the way CLL describes.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

 

[Felipe Gonçalves Assis]

In any case, can someone please document that online in whatever the appropriate place is? I don't think the mailing list archives are good enough for this.

mu'o
mi'e .asiz.

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

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.