On "by standard x"

[v4hn]

coi rodo

One of the many things about lojban which puzzle me lately
are all these "by standard x" places.

Take {fenki} for example which is defined as

x1 (action/event) is crazy/insane/mad/frantic/in a
frenzy (one sense) by standard x2

Given that definition, what does {tu'a ko'a fenki mi} mean?

Does it mean ko'a is crazy in my opinion,
or does it mean ko'a is crazy when compared to me?

Phrasing it differently, which standard
do these places represent: A standard of _judgement_
or a standard of _comparison_?


mi'e la .van. mu'o

[Ian Johnson]

My understanding is that the "by standard" places are manri, and that we don't really know what a manri is except that they are not concrete. An ideal solution would be that manri are ka, functions that say whether the se manri apply. This is clumsy in practice, however; for example I can't come up with a practical fenki2 of this type.

mi'e la latro'a mu'o

[Michael Turniansky]

  In the particular gismu you cite, I would say "standard of judgment"

           --gejyspa

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:44 AM, v4hn <m...@v4hn.de> wrote:

[Demian Koller]

I've wondered the same thing. It does seem to imply a certain relativism or subjective judgment in some contexts.

[v4hn]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 01:48:00PM -0500, Michael Turniansky wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:44 AM, v4hn <m...@v4hn.de> wrote:
> > Take {fenki} for example which is defined as
> >
> > x1 (action/event) is crazy/insane/mad/frantic/in a
> > frenzy (one sense) by standard x2

> > [...]

> > Phrasing it differently, which standard
> > do these places represent: A standard of _judgement_
> > or a standard of _comparison_?
>

> In the particular gismu you cite, I would say "standard of judgment"
> --gejyspa
>

Finally someone has an opinion about it, ki'e la gejyspa

I really hope this does not depend on any particular gismu,
because all these places are phrased the very same.
Therefore, I would like to have one accepted interpretation of them.

Also, given these places have one meaning, how would
one phrase the other meaning accordingly?


v4hn

[MorphemeAddict]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:20 PM, v4hn <m...@v4hn.de> wrote:

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 01:48:00PM -0500, Michael Turniansky wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:44 AM, v4hn <m...@v4hn.de> wrote:

> > Take {fenki} for example which is defined as
> >
> > x1 (action/event) is crazy/insane/mad/frantic/in a
> > frenzy (one sense) by standard x2

> > [...]

> > Phrasing it differently, which standard
> > do these places represent: A standard of _judgement_
> > or a standard of _comparison_?
>

>   In the particular gismu you cite, I would say "standard of judgment"
>            --gejyspa
>

Finally someone has an opinion about it, ki'e la gejyspa

I really hope this does not depend on any particular gismu,
because all these places are phrased the very same.
Therefore, I would like to have one accepted interpretation of them.

The standard can be any kind of standard, which can be utterly trivial, like "by the standard of me". "Standard of judgment" is just one example that makes sense in the context of {fenki}. 

stevo 

[v4hn]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:00:28PM -0500, MorphemeAddict wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:20 PM, v4hn <m...@v4hn.de> wrote:
> > I really hope this does not depend on any particular gismu,
> > because all these places are phrased the very same.
> > Therefore, I would like to have one accepted interpretation of them.
>
> The standard can be any kind of standard, which can be utterly trivial,
> like "by the standard of me". "Standard of judgment" is just one example
> that makes sense in the context of {fenki}.
>

That interpretation is highly ambiguous. "by the standard of me" is polysemous
w.r.t. judgment and comparison. That's the reason why I would like to know
what it means to put a material object/individual into this place.


v4hn

[Michael Turniansky]

  No, stevo is right.  It IS ambiguous, but that's because you asked about a specifically ambiguous construction (a bare "mi").  If you had said "...lo ka mi jinvi lo du'u ce'u fenki" that would unambiguously state you are judging it by the x1 to be fenki by the standard you consider something to be fenki.  If you said "...lo ka karbi ce'u mi", you be asserting that it would be by comparison to you.  By just saying "mi" it could be either (or even possibly more wild ideas involving "mi").  I merely asserted that most people would probably assume a simple person/people/nation in that piece of fenki would assume a standard of judgment.  But if the sentence had be, for example "lo mi mlatu cu fenki lo mi gerku", you would be more likely asserting that your cat is crazy in comparison to your dog...

      --gejyspa