From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jul 11 14:11:28 2006 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G0PVc-0001ez-Kl for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:08 -0700 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.183]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G0PVZ-0001ek-TO for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:08 -0700 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id d42so3983913pyd for ; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:05 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=lxw8P69YQsUIWZZJsZZlfbU5AVaEnSE8kjFdDgsS+AkTbXkGxc7GlsP67FIac82oe1hp2uIolSwQrFmRJCzhVmv5IkbzVYXA/m60pRXuv95Md1OxhEkohMhJOVme2qhgNmQPPvRpS/yk6b/IPWb+SWbiMkmP6xsnajakZoEPDgI= Received: by 10.35.57.5 with SMTP id j5mr7175367pyk; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.39.7 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:11:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 15:11:04 -0600 From: "Maxim Katcharov" To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: A (rather long) discussion of {all} In-Reply-To: <925d17560607111341h47d6a148k1696c8566c665c62@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060711202019.94622.qmail@web56411.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <925d17560607111341h47d6a148k1696c8566c665c62@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.4 (--) X-archive-position: 12118 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: maxim.katcharov@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On 7/11/06, Jorge Llambías wrote: > Maxim Katcharov wrote: > > I don't suggest that a language would not function without plurals, > > but that it's odd that the line was drawn between 1 and 2. Without an > > explanation for this, one would think that there are languages out > > there that have a pervasive plural that makes itself known between 2 > > and 3, for example. > > There are such languages. See: > for some examples. > Are these 'dual/trial numbers' as pervasive as the "1 vs >1" distinction in those languages? I doubt it. What I would like to see is a natural language that has one verbiage for, say, 1 and 2 things, and another for 3 or more. Or perhaps a language that has only few vs many. Clearly, a language can be constructed with this requirement, and it's a gamble to say that one shouldn't exist. My point is that the tendency of many natural languages to draw the line at 1|2+ seems to indicate something, and I suggest that it is that thought works in the way that I describe. This isn't an argument for my position, and my position isn't dependant on this. It is, as I said, just something to consider. 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.