Date:  Fri, 12 Dec 1997 12:53:17 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199712121753.MAA10219@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Organization: University of Central Lancashire
Subject:      Re: category errors in sumti
X-To:         LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 726
X-From-Space-Date: Fri Dec 12 12:53:18 1997
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

Lojbab to me:
> Cowan may have just said something roughly like this but:
> >The fact remains that it IS possible for a selbri to have a sumti that
> >must be concrete or must be abstract, just as it is possible for a
> >selbri to have a sumti that must be male or must be female.
>
> But the latter is not particularly true.  Can you give an example of
> one?

Easy. I could easily create a lujvo or fu`ivla to do the job,
but I don't need to: {nanmu} and {ninmu} immediately spring
to mind. x1 of nanmu must be male.

> On the other hand there are sumti places that would make no SENSE if an
> abstraction were used instead of a concrete, and vice versa.

I'm glad to see this obvious fact has finally dawned on you.

--And