Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.17.22 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.227.17.22;
Message-ID: <51728C7E.5070006@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 14:39:26 +0200
From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] 5 classes of sumti in Lojban and about a new word for
 "grammatical abstraction"
References: <6af67de9-ce70-4e20-af69-a1acc87a840f@googlegroups.com> <CA+gZtgKEZnSYuifM5TQsy5xpiiHGk6a85bZGBdx13CvSh0CAuQ@mail.gmail.com> <E00AC37B-E501-4537-BCB8-5C33F0161A84@gmail.com> <f01f0fba-444c-441d-aee4-9d3cfc70d8c5@googlegroups.com> <CAOQ8VDUi=pN_BeHJbMqWEckTi7GcHhea1K-N5UrW4dZ-74CkmA@mail.gmail.com> <b5db4afd-f5d3-46c5-bca0-1478e7e3c9ad@googlegroups.com> <CAOQ8VDXvhtgUPh15SODWkJb2JE1_GosouQBNuwsJ9-5FOHLWHA@mail.gmail.com> <56d72310-6c53-49fd-94b5-51e8c0691b8a@googlegroups.com> <CAOQ8VDVu-sqegyFt55ZQsd041Fec2Pj4LdjxHH8rM=JE9q7Ysg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ8VDVu-sqegyFt55ZQsd041Fec2Pj4LdjxHH8rM=JE9q7Ysg@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

la tsani cu cusku di'e
> In sum, {ni} is not a class of its own, but is convenient to have
> because it allows us to make simplifications with {ka}-abstractions. In
> my original abstractions paper, I suggested that {ni} is {ka la'u
> makau}

I always wondered why you went with {la'u ma kau} instead of {se la'u ma 
kau}. klani1 is the thing being measured (for example a table), and {ni} 
usually wants to return some sort of quantity/number.

I currently see three different {ni}'s floating around:

ni1 ~ ka se la'u ma kau
ni2 ~ jai se la'u
ni3 ~ "vague comparable quantity" (which latro'a claims is primitive and 
therefore can't be defined in Lojban.)

ni1 is still a property, ni2 is a pure number, I don't know what ni3 is.

For me it's a little odd to have {ni} with and without {ce'u}, since 
they are rather different things. At the moment, I lean towards ni2 -- a 
pure number (and not containing {ce'u} -- not only because it gives us a 
way to turn any bridi into a number, it also does not take away the 
option to use it in property places, because we can say {ka ma kau ni}.

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i


-- 
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.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.