From lojban-out@lojban.org Tue Jul 11 13:51:01 2006 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 64910 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2006 20:21:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m22.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 11 Jul 2006 20:21:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 11 Jul 2006 20:21:31 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G0OjV-0000bh-Px for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:21:25 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G0Oiw-0000Zh-J2; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:20:51 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G0OiV-0000ZJ-4W for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:20:23 -0700 Received: from web56411.mail.re3.yahoo.com ([216.252.111.90]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1G0OiS-0000ZA-Pk for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:20:22 -0700 Received: (qmail 94624 invoked by uid 60001); 11 Jul 2006 20:20:19 -0000 Message-ID: <20060711202019.94622.qmail@web56411.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Received: from [75.2.89.1] by web56411.mail.re3.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:20:19 PDT Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:20:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1258496468-1152649219=:88098" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-archive-position: 12109 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: nathanielkrause@yahoo.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 X-eGroups-From: Nathaniel Krause From: Nathaniel Krause Reply-To: nathanielkrause@yahoo.com Subject: [lojban] Re: A (rather long) discussion of {all} X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=iqwNmm1_C07Eg5ZTdq5RhEshMjahsPOQGY5Xohqs6Ef9Z0-dNA X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 26540 --0-1258496468-1152649219=:88098 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Maxim Katcharov wrote:When I first started learning Lojban, I found the translation of English plurals strange. {su'o re la gerku} seemed like an unintuitive and deficient translation of "the dogs" - is that really the only reason we have plurals? was the distinction between numerical 1 and all those numbers greater than 1 - was this distinction by itself important enough to have such a great effect on language? I didn't think much of it at the time, but looking back now I find that this corresponds to my position. It is my understanding that the large difference between 1 and >1 stems from how our minds treat single entities vs single entities composed of many entities."su'o re la gerku" is about as good a translation of "the dogs" as anything you'd find in Chinese. That is, it's certainly possible to have a functioning language that ignores the difference between 1 and >1. Interestingly, Chinese does have a plural, but it can only be used to describe people. -Nat Krause __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --0-1258496468-1152649219=:88098 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Maxim Katcharov <maxim.katcharov@gmail.com> wrote:
When I first started
learning Lojban, I found the translation of English plurals strange.
{su'o re la gerku} seemed like an unintuitive and deficient
translation of "the dogs" - is that really the only reason we have
plurals? was the distinction between numerical 1 and all those numbers
greater than 1 - was this distinction by itself important enough to
have such a great effect on language? I didn't think much of it at the
time, but looking back now I find that this corresponds to my
position. It is my understanding that the large difference between 1
and >1 stems from how our minds treat single entities vs single
entities composed of many entities.
"su'o re la gerku" is about as good a translation of "the dogs" as anything you'd find in Chinese. That is, it's certainly possible to have a functioning language that ignores the difference between 1 and >1.

Interestingly, Chinese does have a plural, but it can only be used to describe people.

-Nat Krause

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com --0-1258496468-1152649219=:88098--