Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of seladwa@gmx.de designates 212.227.15.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.227.15.18;
Message-ID: <52F405D6.7060104@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2014 22:59:50 +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>	<52F26B9E.2090001@gmx.de>	<5e023b9a-515c-432b-a389-8f9af4766b51@googlegroups.com>	<52F29ED8.1050607@gmx.de>	<a337096c-d88e-4387-a3d7-9642195e72af@googlegroups.com>	<52F372FF.1000201@gmx.de> <CAO7tK2cVvebFYD9r-eLFfJPSuBBvicTjno0cHm1+jhzPRQYd4w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2cVvebFYD9r-eLFfJPSuBBvicTjno0cHm1+jhzPRQYd4w@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 .xorxes. cu cusku di'e
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 8:33 AM, selpa'i <seladwa@gmx.de
> <mailto:seladwa@gmx.de>> wrote:
>
>     la .guskant. cu cusku di'e
>
>
>         If you suggest another short term for "something in a domain of
>         plural
>         variable, saying nothing about collectivity/distributivity", I would
>         abandon my usage of "mass" in this meaning.
>
>
>     A term that I've been using, but which doesn't seem to be very
>     wide-spread (yet?), is "individual-collection". Anything that can be
>     expressed as {X jo'u Y jo'u Z ...} is an individual collection and
>     is identical to a {lo broda} with those {jo'u}-connected referents.
>
>
> The problem with that, with whatever term is chosen in the metalanguage
> to talk about the language, is that the term eventually leaks into the
> language, and then collections become individuals too.

That is indeed a possible danger, I agree. But of course we need to be 
able to talk about it *somehow* (both in English and in Lojban), 
although I will grant that it is logic/linguistics jargon and thus of 
lower priority than everyday life vocabulary, which Lojban is still 
lacking to a great extent.

> I prefer to say that the domain of plural variables is
> just individuals, not something else, but that variables don't need to
> take one value at a time.

I agree 100% with that.

mi'e la selpa'i mu'o

-- 
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.