Date:  Mon, 8 Dec 1997 11:44:37 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199712081644.LAA11449@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: semisummary: countability
X-To:         LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 1288
X-From-Space-Date: Mon Dec  8 11:44:41 1997
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

Jorge:
> And:
> >However, does {valsi} mean (a) "is a single word", or does it
> >mean (b) "is wordage"?
>  >
>  >Under (a), {re da cu valsi} it would mean "Each of two things
> >is a single word". Under (b) it would mean "Each of two
> >things is wordage, and the two things are differentiated from
> >other individuals by virtue of each being a single word".
>
> A couple of questions:
>
> 1) If {[piro] lei re valsi cu valsi} is true, then is {[piro] lei re valsi}
> a member of {lo'i valsi}?
>
> 2) If two words are wordage, is half a word wordage too?
> i xu zoi gy thr gy cu valsi bau le glico

They are good questions. My answer to (2) would be No: wordage
contains at least one word, because half a word lacks the
requisite properties (like having a sense and a selma`o). But
{plise} (apple) might be different, because half an apple
does have sufficient properties to be appleage.

As for (1), I don't know. If you changed the example to pertain
to {xekri} or {djacu}, the answer would be Yes. But I can't think
of a principled reason for deciding it in the case of {valsi},
{mlatu}, etc.

I'm not so much seeking some kind of collective agreement on the
answers to these questions as much as some kind of collective
agreement on what the internally-coherent options are.

--And