From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jun 27 13:36:19 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:36:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FvKHw-0002ho-F2 for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:36:00 -0700 Received: from web81315.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.199.41]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1FvKHu-0002hg-S2 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:36:00 -0700 Received: (qmail 86804 invoked by uid 60001); 27 Jun 2006 20:35:57 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Tn9iO0jSxJnPXKeCCYqNFmKIF8TlbcHRX6o+kX1GQVshrk4Hm0dUcWbDd3soMZu4FJbFCCSNwnH79Gsd5VR4WBwjGAFlJhdLj5PGKSVhV0TNWaHm8rIwBPZGYu05LVJrl//xI3cw0sTTD5zo0BYxFFELSYcQmiVtopa+yzb1YnM= ; Message-ID: <20060627203557.86802.qmail@web81315.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [70.237.199.54] by web81315.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:35:57 PDT Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 13:35:57 -0700 (PDT) From: John E Clifford Subject: [lojban] Re: plural markers? To: lojban-list@lojban.org In-Reply-To: <737b61f30606270732o2cf31bf1y3fc813a88377791f@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-archive-position: 11840 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list Actually, the "problem" expression is the singular. Lojban descriptions are of a number of things; that that number is 1 is as special a case as that it is 83. So -- context permitting -- the best plural is just the form without internal quantifiers at all. Now context -- including external knowledge -- can modify that, and the various gadri have different implications: {lVi} and {lV'i} are very strongly plural in all contexts, {la} usually suggests singular, {le} less strongly so, {lo} not at all. And, of course, whether the apples all falling at the same time is about a "mass" depends upon what you say: In "The apples fell simultaneously" yes, in "The apples fell at 10:47 a.m. CDT on June 27, 2006" probably not. --- Chris Capel wrote: > On 6/27/06, HeliodoR wrote: > > > But I think more common than {za'u} or {su'o re}, when > > > plurality is made explicit, will be {so'u}, {so'o}, {so'i}, "a few", > > > "several", "many". > > > > When {ro} [something] signs multiple things does {so'u} > > [something] imply plurality? Exactly one object is a few > > objects, isn't it? > > Not in English. It means, roughly, at least 3, but still a small > number, in small groups ("A few of the chairs in my house") or when > specifying group size ("I own a few guns"), and 5-10% in large groups > ("A few of the strawberries that were harvested"). > > Chris Capel > -- > "What is it like to be a bat? What is it like to bat a bee? What is it > like to be a bee being batted? What is it like to be a batted bee?" > -- The Mind's I (Hofstadter, Dennet) > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org > with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if > you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help. > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.