Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 19:08:52 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199710170008.TAA23799@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS Sender: Lojban list From: JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS Subject: Re: forward from Greg Higley X-To: lojban To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1359 X-From-Space-Date: Thu Oct 16 19:08:59 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU cu'u la djan >I think that a zero-adic intension ("ka" with no "ce'u" explicit >or implicit) is a "du'u". The word "property" is too limited >to capture the full meaning of "le ka ...", which means >"proposition" when zero-adic, "property" when monadic, and >"relation" when dy-or-more-adic. Sounds _Right_. I gave some examples in another message where you need dyadics (but I didn't fill in the {ce'u}s to avoid adding yet another issue). Consider: lei va plise cu klani li mu le ka kancu Those apples amount to 5 by the relation X1 is counted to be X2. Here {le ka kancu} means {le ka zo'e kancu ce'upipa ce'upire} = "The relation X1 is counted to be X2". Here we need two {ce'u}s because {le ka kancu} is not a property of only {lei plise} nor of only {li mu}. It is a relationship between them. The same happens in: mi merli le cilta li pano le ka ce'upipa mitre ce'upire I measure the rope to be 10 by the relation X1 is in meters X2. Of course you wouldn't normally make the {ce'u}s explicit. We just say: mi merli le cilta li pano le ka mitre I measure the rope to be 10 in meters. >> The default place for {ce'u} is the first open slot. >Probably usually. It's not a rule. I agree. (Look at my {le ka kancu} example above.) co'o mi'e xorxes