Re: CPE: Corliss Lamont

["Jorge J. Llambias" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

la markl di'e cusku

> + syllogism = le cmulojmo'a

Hmmm... Could you explain a bit how you get to that?
This is how I would do it using those components:

lojycmu [logji jicmu]: j1 (j2=l1) l2
         x1 is a fundamental/basic principle of logic
             reflected in the reasoning of (text) x2.

That would already give a word for syllogism: {se lojycmu}
or {selkemlojycmu}. If you still want to use morna:

lojycmumo'a [lojycmu morna]: m1=lc2 m2 (m3=lc1)
            x1 is a syllogism with components x2.

It is important when you create a lujvo to account for
all the places of the component gismu, not just for their x1
places. If your lujvo is based on morna then you will have
places corresponding to the x2 and x3 of morna, or you have
to explain how those places disappear, i.e. what they are
filled with. In my proposal the x2 remains and the x3 is
filled with the x1 of lojycmu.

> + mortal = cu mrobi'o

Yes:

mrobi'o [morsi binxo]: b1=m1 [b2=ka morsi]
                x1 dies.

Perhaps you don't even need binxo, since morsi already
contains the idea that something must have been alive
before being dead, and you are not referring to the
actual change of state in any case.

> + immortal = cu vi'orji'e

I prefer ji'ervi'o:

ji'ervi'o [jmive vitno]: v1=j1 [v2=ka jmive]
          x1 is immortal/permanently alive.

I hadn't noticed the -bi'o/-vi'o contrast before.
Really neat! As a Spanish speaker, I will have to be
careful to make the b/v distinction.

You can defend vi'orji'e, I suppose, but I find
ji'ervi'o more harmonious.

> + philosophy = lezu'o pijysisku

I think philosophy has to be a saske. I suppose you
can view all sciences as seekings, and I don't see
a problem with describing it as such, but for the standard
word I would use saske. Perhaps:

kampijyske [kamprije saske]: s1 (s2=kp1)
                            x1 is [a] philosophy.

I don't add the x3 of saske because I don't think it
should be there in the first place. If you do agree
that it should be there, then it should appear in kampijyske
as well.

I don't know whether kamprije (wisdom) is the best word to
form that lujvo, but I can't thing of anything less bad at the
moment. Any suggestions from the philosophers?

> + personality = le prekai

prekai [prenu ckaji]: c1=p1 [c2=ka prenu]
                      x1 has personality/is a person.

kampre [ka prenu]: x1 is personality/the property of being
                   a person.

> + soul = le ruxyse'i

Yes:

ruxyse'i [pruxi sevzi]: s1=p1 s2
                        x1 is the/a soul of x2.

> + hypothesis = le skecipsmadi

Maybe just {selru'a}. In any case, a skecipsmadi would be
a hypothesizer, not a hypothesis.

> +
> + All men are mortal
> + = .i ro le remna cu mrobi'o

Better:

        ro remna cu mrobi'o

Or what is the same: {ro lo remna}. {ro le remna} means
all the men (all of those that you are talking about),
not necessarily all men in the absolute.

> + Socrates is a man.
> + = .i la SOkrates. cu remna
> + Therefore Socrates is mortal.
> + = .i la SOkrates. seni'i cu mrobi'o

I would say:

i seni'ibo la SOkrates cu mrobi'o

which says that the previous sentences logically
entail the current one. The way you have it isn't
wrong, but it is less clear what is it that the
sentence logically follows from.

Hope this helps,

co'o mi'e xorxes