From @gate.demon.co.uk,@uga.cc.uga.edu:lojban@cuvmb.bitnet Fri Jun 09 22:04:09 1995 Received: from punt.demon.co.uk by stryx.demon.co.uk with SMTP id AA3315 ; Fri, 09 Jun 95 22:04:03 BST Received: from punt3.demon.co.uk via puntmail for ia@stryx.demon.co.uk; Fri, 09 Jun 95 10:13:48 GMT Received: from gate.demon.co.uk by punt3.demon.co.uk id aa14299; 9 Jun 95 11:12 +0100 Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by gate.demon.co.uk id ab04373; 8 Jun 95 18:18 GMT-60:00 Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 9259; Thu, 08 Jun 95 10:43:38 EDT Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7725; Thu, 8 Jun 1995 10:28:45 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 Jun 1995 10:31:51 EDT Reply-To: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu Subject: Re: properties of masses X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Iain Alexander Message-ID: <9506081818.ab04373@gate.demon.co.uk> Status: R la lojbab cusku di'e > I don't see any problem with pisu'o as a quantifier for masses. It means > "at least some" - it does not mean "part of". I don't see a problem with it either. There is a problem only if you insist that every property of a component is also automatically a property of the whole mass, as it is stated in many places. > All of something is certainly > within the qualifications of "at least some". Similarly the su'o default > quantifier on "da" isn't "wrong", i.e. makes the sentence false, if it turns > out that roda broda is true. I agree. Quantifiers are not the problem, as long as we don't force all the properties of the components on the mass. Jorge