Message-Id: <000302135626DJ.24938@weba7.iname.net>
To: lojban@onelist.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list lojban@onelist.com; contact lojban-owner@onelist.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 13:56:26 -0500 (EST)
From: bwebste@simons-rock.edu
Subject: [lojban] Mass/Set
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 1549
Lines: 27

From: bwebste@simons-rock.edu

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.  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?  

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.  If I where talking about my baement being flooded, I might say "lei djacu," but if I were talking about the interaction of water molecules in kinetic theory, I might say "le'i djacu."

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

co'o bendjamn.


-----------------------------------------------------
Get free personalized email at http://email.lycos.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------
GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds!  Get rates as low as 2.9%
Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees.  Apply NOW!
http://click.egroups.com/1/936/1/_/17627/_/952023632/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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