From lojban+bncCIfp7ILVEBCEhbzuBBoEYj24sQ@googlegroups.com Sat May 14 15:30:42 2011 Received: from mail-yw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.213.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QLNM6-000104-7J; Sat, 14 May 2011 15:30:42 -0700 Received: by ywg8 with SMTP id 8sf4404591ywg.16 for ; Sat, 14 May 2011 15:30:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1KWQM4ROOByjzpnpq8hw2XnudTK9KfT6fGdv94pgTjQ=; b=G+7E8xAakke4adcOQRM/RDAWdr7Y2vxdViyW6Rj5Y9a0Fk8nyGdd6AOhhbohICw3WM hPVd5CqlndpFBbc1WbOGfVJ/amOYpnN+6bdQlOWScvEQvA+2RTXWyNkNaXATQDFL+87B +AKF75t0DsQ+ujKaeH0p+QLnISJBq0Bhcc6is= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from :to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=XeBrcENpN1YP7fF5hmelms9su/Ezz0dGRgelXg/MCQ+Km6zO6bHs8My3cRjeFb/rgh fEnzOVwDpA7Ke2aP7E32bNARQa/SWGFUcKXetOXD/wfVNzlWV7nz5+31OBiaWHckbHu+ c6jJoc1PEApV2HY5/SwjHwKr3BCDWnqlpfVo8= Received: by 10.91.6.1 with SMTP id j1mr297504agi.44.1305412228174; Sat, 14 May 2011 15:30:28 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.160.132 with SMTP id n4ls2324506ibx.0.gmail; Sat, 14 May 2011 15:30:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.91.210 with SMTP id o18mr1109730ibm.16.1305412227145; Sat, 14 May 2011 15:30:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.91.210 with SMTP id o18mr1109729ibm.16.1305412227128; Sat, 14 May 2011 15:30:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iw0-f171.google.com (mail-iw0-f171.google.com [209.85.214.171]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dz6si843103ibb.7.2011.05.14.15.30.27 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 14 May 2011 15:30:27 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.171 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.171; Received: by iwn8 with SMTP id 8so4269274iwn.2 for ; Sat, 14 May 2011 15:30:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.161.138 with SMTP id t10mr3574466icx.3.1305412226719; Sat, 14 May 2011 15:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.178.10 with HTTP; Sat, 14 May 2011 15:30:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 19:30:26 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Masses From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Felipe_Gon=E7alves_Assis?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: felipeg.assis@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.171 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=felipeg.assis@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable coi rodo From the talk <[lojban] "lo no">: 2011/5/14 Jorge Llamb=EDas : > I agree with the gist of tijlan's post, but I'd like to add some observat= ions. > > On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 7:56 AM, tijlan wrote: >> lo ci gerku =3D da poi gerku je cimei >> lo no gerku =3D da poi gerku je nomei > > lo ci gerku =3D zo'e noi gerku gi'e cimei > lo no gerku =3D zo'e noi gerku gi'e nomei > These interpretations look wrong to me. The individuals are {gerku}, while only the mass composed of them is a {cimei}. This distinction is essential, so that, e.g., the referents of {da poi jenmi je so'imei}, {zo'e noi jenmi gi'e so'imei}, and {lo jenmi je so'imei} can all be unambiguously understood to be an army (or armies) of many soldiers, instead of a lot of armies, regardless of semantic nuances between these expressions. Were we to accept that a mass of broda can always be described as broda in any of these ways, then we would have to accept that a mass of two armies, each one composed of a thousand men is a {jenmi gi'e solci gi'e remei gi'e ki'omei}. In particular, we must accept {remei je ki'omei} to be no contradiction. More importantly: How would I clarify that my broda is just a broda, and not any conceivable mass (of masses of masses... ) of broda? Perhaps by saying something like {broda gi'e gunma noda poi broda}? In summary, systematically assigning to a mass the properties of its individuals, while not logically problematic, is highly confusing, and requires heavy work when a common disambiguation is called for. I would say that the meaning of {lo PA broda cu brode} is closer to either {PA da broda .i da poi broda cu brode} (CLL), or {PA lo broda cu brode} (xorlo only), or {zo'e noi gunma PA da poi broda cu brode} (xorlo only). What do you think? mu'o mi'e .asiz. --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.