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: <52F224EA.1000108@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 12:47:54 +0100
From: selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Individuals and xorlo
References: <CAN2DD_E0QBcidfV+rp=N+rW1YeYtOanugo172BbgwFmswA2-SA@mail.gmail.com>	<CAO7tK2cTUxZvNpLPZk2+PwKeKm1FeAOrszb0KrO2iOkuL5yNYw@mail.gmail.com>	<CAN2DD_Gz9d2v9LRw1_bEmGtXU8_QOQTWo2Tk3REUsSS6QMw53g@mail.gmail.com> <CAO7tK2eAuPVCjEz-jGuXgTvK-5RNjn9u7OqJoAMVHRv2nr6GRw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2eAuPVCjEz-jGuXgTvK-5RNjn9u7OqJoAMVHRv2nr6GRw@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
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam_score: 0.0
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

la .xorxes. cu cusku di'e
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Dan Ros=E9n <lurifax@gmail.com
> <mailto:lurifax@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>     I'm using the expansions suggested in
>     http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section:+gadri, where
>
>
>          lo pa xanto =3D zo'e noi ke'a xanto gi'e zilkancu li pa lo xanto=
,
>
>     but {lo xanto} can be plural, so this removes the effect of the
>     zilkancu part. Is it that I misunderstand this equation, or is it
>     just false?
>
>
> I don't think it's quite right to say that "lo xanto" can be plural,
> because Lojban doesn't have grammatical number, so it can't strictly be
> singular or plural. But a natural translation of "lo xanto" in this
> context would indeed be plural in English, something like "is 1 counting
> in elephants".

If I may, Dan is asking why the unit {lo xanto} cannot be (implicitly)=20
{lo ci xanto}, in which case three elephants would be counted as one=20
counting off by threes. Using a property in zilkancu3 would probably be=20
clearer for that reason. As it stands, some people seem to think that=20
the zilkancu3 unit contains a context-dependent inner quantifier, thus=20
counting of by {xo'e mei}. I don't think that's the intended meaning, so=20
it should be stated clearly that we're dealing with singletons.

mi'e la selpa'i mu'o

--=20
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 e=
mail 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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.