Return-Path: Return-Path: id ; Tue, 25 Jun 91 13:09:42 EDT Message-Id: <9106251709.AA10976@dino> Date: Tue, 25 Jun 91 13:09:42 EDT From: cbmvax!uunet!dino.ulowell.edu!gryphon (Coranth) To: lojban-list@snark.thyrsus.com Subject: "people"... Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Tue Jun 25 22:29:56 1991 X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!dino.ulowell.edu!gryphon Art Protin comments on Richard Kennaway's neat quote, and complains that the meaning of "people" is ambiguous. When in doubt default to the simplest meaning - plural of person. On a different matter, could someone please explain why "Mr. Person" is being used to refer to the mass-term of people (plural of person), as opposed to the archetypical person. I say archetypical person because the title "Mr." when used this way is most commonly intended as a personification of a instance of this class, and the personification of a non-specific person is an archetype. Likewise, "Mr. Rabbit" is a personified rabbit, "Mr. Table" a personified table, etc. and I think that "le jubme prenu" is more useful to talk about a personified table (maybe "le prenu jubme") than "lei jubme". I seem to be talking about something different from the general flow of conversation and wish someone would give me a clearer idea of what the problem is. co'o. rodo mi'e korant.