Date:  Sun, 12 Oct 1997 14:21:30 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199710121921.OAA19054@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Subject:      Re: clani
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Status: RO
Content-Length: 1194
Lines: 30

Lojbab:
>> both the short thing and the long thing have both
>>"ka mitre" and "ni mitre", but the short thing has /neither/ "ka
>>clani" nor "ni clani".  Something with very little "ni clani" is
>>still "clani", just not very much so.
>
>I will disagree because "tordu" != "na clani".  The nature of short things
is
>that, by a different standard, they could be long things.  Now if you fill
>in a  very large standard, even a "long" object will noy be "clani" with
>respect to that object.

I think that what Lee was saying is that given a standard, a short
thing _by that standard_ has neither "ka clani" nor "ni clani". But both
the short thing and the long thing (short and long by that standard)
have "ka mitre".

         ro mitre cu ckaji le ka mitre
         i ku'i ko'a goi lo te clani zo'u ro mitre na ckaji le ka clani fi
ko'a

        Every measurable object has length (ka mitre)
        But, for a given standard K, it is not the case that
        every measurable object has K-longness (ka clani).

If you intend to compare the longness (ka clani) of two objects,
then you better pick two objects that have it. For a given ka clani,
many objects won't have it.

co'o mi'e xorxes