Message-Id: <199511251352.IAA06713@locke.ccil.org>
Date:         Sat, 25 Nov 1995 08:40:01 -0500
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      stages vs. individuals
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR

Jorge:
>Also interesting are his "kinds":  individual, stage, and generic.
>"Generic" I think corresponds to Lojban's {lo'e}, but Lojban makes no
>distinction between his "individuals" and "stages":  {mi se cmene zo
>xorxes} and {mi klama le zarci} use the same {mi}, even though the first
>is mi the individual and the second is only a stage of mi the
>individual.

Lojban does that with tense, and sumti can be tensed as well as bridi:

mi pe ze'a cu se cmene la lojbab

The me associated with a medium length of time is called Lojbab.

le pujenaica pendo cu klama le zarci

The former friend goes to the store.

And

mi pe ze'e klama le zarci

seems to me to assert the "individual" mi rather than the "stage" mi
that is going to the store (or maybe it works better with no "pe" so the
ze'e attaches to the selbri) though one has to get into the Achilles
paradox to find a use for that concept.

lojbab