Message-ID: <20000303005436.12039.qmail@hotmail.com>
To: lojban@onelist.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list lojban@onelist.com; contact lojban-owner@onelist.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 16:54:36 PST
From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Mass/Set
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 3123
Lines: 87

From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>


la bendjamn cusku di'e

>I don't understand what all the argument is about.  It sounds as though the 
>distinction that's being made here is simply that between mass and count 
>nouns.

This is part of what created the confusion, but it is not the
main distinction we make with the mass gadri.

>Note that when you talk about a set, you use the plural ("men", "golf 
>clubs"), and when you talk about masses you use the singular ("water", 
>"meat").  What's so hard about that?

In Lojban, you could translate "men" as {le nanmu}, {lei nanmu},
and, very seldom, as {le'i nanmu}. It depends on what you want
to claim about the men. Water most often would be just {le djacu}.
Rarely {lei djacu} or even less {le'i djacu}. The "mass noun"
idea of English is already incorporated into the definition
of "djacu", "a quantity of water", so that it is not really
necessary in general to use a mass article with it.

>Lojban takes an interesting line in allowing any predicate to fit in any 
>category, so whether a mass or set is used depends on what
>properties I want to emphasize.

What properties you want to claim. If you want to say something
about each of the men, you use {le nanmu}, if you want to say
something about all of them together, you use {lei nanmu}.

For example:

           le nanmu cu citka lo plise
           Each of the men eats an apple.

You don't want top say that the men all together eat an apple.

           lei nanmu cu bevri le bloti
           The men (together) carry the boat.

You don't want to say that each of the men carries the boat
by himself.

>If I where talking about my baement being flooded, I might say "lei djacu,"

You might, but {le djacu} would serve just as well.

>but if I were talking about the interaction of water molecules in kinetic 
>theory, I might say "le'i djacu."

I would have to see the full sentence. I doubt you would
want to bring mathematical sets into it. I would probably
use {le djacu selci} or {lei djacu selci}, depending on the
claim.

>Just as a thought, "le'i" would also be handy plural marker, and could be 
>adapted to this process when the baseline is lifted.  It already seems to 
>work with actions ("le'i prenu le zdani cu
>klama"),

No it doesn't! Mathematical sets can't go to the market.
They are not physical things like {lei prenu} or {le prenu}.
They don't go places.

>but unfortunately not with descriptions ("le'i prenu cu merko" means the 
>set is American, not the people).

Which is a very odd notion. Mathematical sets don't
have nationality.

co'o mi'e xorxes

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


------------------------------------------------------------------------
PERFORM CPR ON YOUR APR!
Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds!  Get rates as low as 
0.0% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees.
Apply NOW!
http://click.egroups.com/1/2121/1/_/17627/_/952045215/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com