From jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Mon May 10 11:25:13 2004 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 10 May 2004 11:25:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from web41907.mail.yahoo.com ([66.218.93.158]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.31) id 1BNFSd-0005ZR-F5 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 10 May 2004 11:25:07 -0700 Message-ID: <20040510182426.93603.qmail@web41907.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.49.74.2] by web41907.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 10 May 2004 11:24:26 PDT Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 11:24:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Jorge "Llambías" Subject: [lojban] Re: loglan/lojban masses/sets To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 7747 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --- Evgeni Sklyanin wrote: > coi rodo > > Could someone give me a summary of the correspondence between Loglan > and Lojban articles for sets and masses? This is not a simple issue, considering that there is not much agreement on how articles work exactly in Lojban. I give you my answer, which is likely not identical to the official one. Loglan "le" is Lojban {le}. That's the easy one. Loglan does not have gadri corresponding to le'i/lo'i. JCB made it clear that by "set" he never meant sets as used in mathematics or logic or any technical sense, but a more ordinary sense of a group of things considered together. So Loglan "leu" is Lojban {lei}. (The canonical example is the men carrying the log, which uses leu in Loglan and lei in Lojban. In Lojban the men tend to carry a piano instead of a log.) Loglan "lea", the gigantic individual, is probably Lojban's {piro loi}, the whole mass. Loglan "lo" is what And once described as "the myopic singularizer", all the individuals considered as one individual (not added together as with "lea" but all superposed into one). For a long time I used Lojban {lo'e} for this as a generic. But now I am using Lojban {lo}, thus returning to the origins in some sense. Loglan does not have anything equivalent to {lo} as {su'o lo}. For that it simply uses the equivalent of {su'o broda}. As far as I know it doesn't have anything like lo'e/le'e either. > Comparing our languages we have stuck with the articles/descriptors. > In particular, I wonder how can I translate from Loglan to Lojban > {Focu mrenu} --- a quartet of persons? Is it {lo'i vo prenu} or > something else? With my current understanding, I'd say {lo vo prenu} for the generic case (as in "this is meant to be played by a quartet") or {le vo prenu} if you have a particular quartet in mind. More traditional Lojbanists would say {lo prenu vomei} or {lo vomei prenu, but don't ask for the tanru expansion. mu'o mi'e xorxes __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover