Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 08:17:32 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199712151317.IAA23745@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: And Rosta Sender: Lojban list From: And Rosta Organization: University of Central Lancashire Subject: Re: category errors in sumti X-To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1014 X-From-Space-Date: Mon Dec 15 08:17:44 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU > >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. > > In order to be TRUE, yes. In order to make sense, not necessarily. > The question was whether it was possible for a selbri to have such a > restricted category of sumti. It is possible to do so, but not all propositions > are true. The question was whether it is possible in Lojban to distinguish between male and female, and to distinguish between concrete and abstract. It is possible to have a selbri whose sumti must be female if the bridi is true. And likewise it is possible to have a selbri whose sumti must be concrete, if the bridi is true. If there were such a selbri making the concrete/abstract distinction, then whether a nu abstraction could be sumti of such a selbri would depend on whether a nu is concrete or abstract. This was my original point, in response to John's suggestion that - in effect - nu are abstract. --And