Message-Id: <MAILQUEUE2-102.931007184709.448@hylkn1.Helsinki.FI>
Date:         Thu, 7 Oct 1993 12:45:22 -0400
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: vilva
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: TECH: long, but major topic: lean lujvo and fat gismu
To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
In-Reply-To:  <199310071638.AA10834@access.digex.net> from "Jorge LLambias" at
              Oct 7, 93 12:37:43 pm
Content-Length: 1048
Lines: 28

mi'e .djan. .i la xorxes. cusku di'e

> > The latter makes a single claim with a single value for the elided places,
> > but that value may be complex.
> >
> > If I go from England to France, and you from Argentina to the U.S., then
> > "mi'o" may be said to have a destination of France, or the U.S., or
> > France {joi} the U.S.
>
> You can really say {mi'o klama le frasygu'e} when only one of us is going?
> That's really confusing. I suppose {mi'o klama le frasygu'e joi le mergu'e}
> is slightly better.

Oh yes.  The properties of a mass are the properties of its components, plus
any emergent properties it may have.  Indeed, I can say "mi'o klama" even
if you are not going anyplace, or (in lojbab's graphic example) if I cut
your hand off and take it with me!

English occasionally uses "we" as a mass pronoun in this way:

        We're having a baby/We're pregnant

may be used by the male member of a couple, e.g.

--
John Cowan              sharing account <lojbab@access.digex.net> for now
                e'osai ko sarji la lojban.