Date: Fri, 2 Jan 1998 11:03:30 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199801021603.LAA02100@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: mark.vines@wholefoods.com Sender: Lojban list From: Mark Vines Subject: Re: X-To: LOJBAN@CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU To: John Cowan In-Reply-To: Steven Belknap "" (Jan 1, 8:17pm) Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 998 X-From-Space-Date: Fri Jan 2 11:03:31 1998 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU la stivn. cusku di'e > Perhaps the standard context in lojbanistan will be fuzzy, > and the statements made in lojban will be shorthand for > fuzzified statements. I don't know that this is desirable, > and I would prefer to explicitly fuzzify until it is clear > to me that your assertion is true. la markl. spuda la stivn. di'e In most hierarchies of markedness, the most intuitive & most commonly used classifications will be the least marked. Because of the intuitiveness of the so-called Whole Object Assumption, & because of the great frequency with which people refer to objects, {le} & {lo} in Lojban are less marked than {lei} & {loi}, even tho ensemble theory suggests that masses are logically more primitive, & should (in a "logical language") be less marked, than objects. If fuzzy statements are more common or more in accord with intuition than absolute statements, then they're likely to be less marked, even in Lojban, even if theory would recommend reversing that hierarchy.