From lojban+bncCIfp7ILVEBCB67zuBBoERfy8bg@googlegroups.com Sat May 14 19:08:15 2011 Received: from mail-yw0-f61.google.com ([209.85.213.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QLQke-0007zK-Gm; Sat, 14 May 2011 19:08:15 -0700 Received: by ywg8 with SMTP id 8sf4494264ywg.16 for ; Sat, 14 May 2011 19:08:06 -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 :in-reply-to:references: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=VXrvH5DewTVWXNDENVv7Q4ZudqNn06z7ZIg3t8jbCt0=; b=EkrsK0YayYedxFXH+8bIhsGw7WqWJf1ZY1wz1fjY3Ns1xdA2Kjgw+Nw65Ru6u7DGjt 3bytD8m61oLdmC4nyXk4h2Q8zMGqgjFQEBFG7L2eweJev0GXXAIFg4O4V400WGa830cR KvyWpKnAS9S3cfjQKeVgjw40Z57j7ODe4QPY8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references: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=ogYYV9/PP7aZpwWAHVkSPS5LT6Q2sMbY5LNb0r3BiCMeF+Vws5l4bePRIXrwqIaaoO y1EpKWBbHZRmWmd5YF1KkL/HOOZAXuzxPir6PnvVHLlFy35cXubLB1uXyJC66hltXKcq udoUUQ1LA3A9e2ZUCrtfip/Xrt2pJk61J3W9o= Received: by 10.151.137.6 with SMTP id p6mr397773ybn.21.1305425281795; Sat, 14 May 2011 19:08:01 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.0.151 with SMTP id 23ls2358494ibb.1.gmail; Sat, 14 May 2011 19:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.142.144 with SMTP id q16mr1167858ibu.13.1305425280960; Sat, 14 May 2011 19:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.142.144 with SMTP id q16mr1167857ibu.13.1305425280940; Sat, 14 May 2011 19:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-iy0-f178.google.com (mail-iy0-f178.google.com [209.85.210.178]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r31si882563ibu.6.2011.05.14.19.08.00 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 14 May 2011 19:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of felipeg.assis@gmail.com designates 209.85.210.178 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.210.178; Received: by mail-iy0-f178.google.com with SMTP id 12so4201544iyi.23 for ; Sat, 14 May 2011 19:08:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.155.70 with SMTP id t6mr3257988icw.405.1305425280601; Sat, 14 May 2011 19:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.178.10 with HTTP; Sat, 14 May 2011 19:08:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <340069.36890.qm@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <340069.36890.qm@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 23:08:00 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [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 209.85.210.178 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 Thanks for your clarifications John, I must say, however, that I am only highly disturbed. Before I proceed with= any discussion, I must ask for help (move this to [lojban-beginners] if appropriate). I have been believing that a mass (whatever you call it) was just as much a logical object as anything else, of a somewhat vague nature, but uniquely associated to a specific set, and as such, to a specific cardinali= ty. This is clearly wrong. Where the CLL introduces lVi descriptors I read "A mass has the properties of each individual which composes it, and may ha= ve other properties of its own as well. This can lead to apparent contradictio= ns." which basically denies my suggestion that masses should not inherit the properties of its individuals. The CLL was my first and primary source for learning lojban, so I can only conclude that this interpretation of masses came to my mind because I felt the need to express such an idea. My big question now is how should I correct my lojban writings and thoughts to the actual definition and community usage of descriptors. For now, I wou= ld appreciate if someone answered the following more specific questions 1. Is {lo jenmi cu sonci} usually true? 2. Is {lo sonci cu jenmi} usually true? 3. For what kind of X can I guarantee {X cu broda naje broda} to be false? 4. What kind of X can refer to a group of three dogs and two cats as a single object for which {X cu gerku je mlatu} is false? 5. How can I unambiguously say "The army is composed of a thousand soldiers= ", as opposed to "a thousand divisions" or "a thousand limbs"? Perhaps {lo jenmi cu ki'omei lo'i sonci}? 6. How can I unambiguously say "The army is powerful", as opposed to "it ha= s a powerful soldier" or "it has a powerful division"? I'd also like to receive pointers about L-sets. Thanks in advance for any attention provided. I also hope this is enlightening to other lojbanists. mu'o mi'e .asiz. On 14 May 2011 20:33, John E Clifford wrote: > Yeah, that is a rub. =A0Officially (insofar as xorlo is official -- which= is > probably more so than just about anything else), {lo} terms are neutral b= etween > the distributive and collective senses (the word "mass" generates a whole= nother > set of problems from Logjam history). =A0Using it as both in a single sen= tence > seems wrong when you think about it, but perfectly natural in use: "The s= tudents > wore green headbands and surrounded the building.". "The girls dressed li= ke Lady > Gaga but were a group of five." =A0There is a temptation to take [lo] ter= ms > without external quantifiers as representing collective use, since those = with > quantifiers are always distributive, but, convenient as that would be (to= avoid > questions about who carried the piano, say), there is greater convenience= (it is > said) in the present system, which allows for the double use and also for= cases > where we just don't know where we don't know (or it doesn't matter) how t= he > group pulled it off. > But that, of course, is separate from the issue about {-mei}. =A0L-sets a= re a > little hard to get used to thought of as sets, but one of the rules about= them > is that (abc)=3D((ab)c)=3D(a(bc))=3D(b(ac))=3D((abc)), so, there is no pa= rticular > problem in the same things constituting a pamei, a remei and a cimei. it'= s all > in how you (mentally or not) group them. =A0And so, of course, is the mat= ter of > what other predicates apply: taken one by one in the freest form the comb= ined > armies are soldiers, in another form, they are armies. =A0And another axi= om is > (a)=3Da, so that. like it or not, your broda is also a pamei. =A0Personal= ly, I would > as soon take the language of {lo} and {-mei} as basic and not try to expa= nd it > out in some string of quantifiers, other nameoids, {noi} or {poi} or what= ever. > Each of these definitions seems to lack some of the simplicity and clarit= y of > the original language and never seem to fit conveniently into other conte= xts. > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Felipe Gon=E7alves Assis > To: lojban@googlegroups.com > Sent: Sat, May 14, 2011 5:30:26 PM > Subject: [lojban] Masses > > 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 observa= tions. >> >> 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 eithe= r > {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. > > -- > 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@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den. > > -- > 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@googlegr= oups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojb= an?hl=3Den. > > --=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.