*kamkuspe

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

Steven Belknap:
>>If what you want to say is quantized logic, .e'u use {selka'u logji}
>>"logic of the thing which is quantized". The tanru mechanism takes care
>>of this. If you said {kamkantu logji}, I would take it to mean "logic of
>>the property of being a quant", not "logic with the property of being
>>quantized"
>
>As you point out, the tanru and lujvo mechanisms are somewhat flexible.
>So far, I prefer <kamkuspe> and <kamkantu> to <selkuspe> and <selkantu>.
>I remain unconvinced that these are wrong.  But you use lojban more than
>me.  Is there some compelling reason you see for calling <kamkantu>
>"wrong"?  You haven't explained this yet.

Not "wrong" just "different" - I don't think the logical x1 of the place
structure would be that useful.  A good way to think of "ka" compounds
is to apply the English suffix "-ness".  So selkantu is "quantized"
while kamkantu is "quantumness".  "selkuspe" means
"ranged"/"ranging"/"continuing over a range" and by inference
"continuous" (but I can envision kantykuspe or kuspykantu, for a ranged
set of quanta).  So "kamkuspe" COULD be "fuzziness", but is not merely
"fuzzy".

lojbab