[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bpfk] BPFK Section: Non-logical Connectives


On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:49 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:
Me and R have been discussing religious teaching methods.


Isn't this example wrong?

"joi" has several different definitions. Two popular ones are:

(1) "ko'a joi ko'e" is plural and its members satisfy the predicate in which it appears as an argument collectively.
(2) "ko'a joi ko'e" is singular, and it refers to a group whose members are ko'a and ko'e.

There are probably other definitions. The example is perfectly fine with (1), and I don't find it problematic with (2) either, unless for some reason you don't want to allow a group of people as the x1 of casnu, but I don't see why a group wouldn't be able to discuss something. 
 

What about the other two examples? Shouldn't {jo'u} or {ce} work better here:

la .djan. joi la .pitr. cu re mei
John and Peter are two.

With our current understanding of "mei", this one would go better with definition (1) than (2). 

la jegvon cu cevni le xriso joi le xebro joi le muslo
Jehovah is the god of the Christians, the Jews and the Muslims.

It doesn't seem to be a problem with either definition.

I would eliminate "joi" from the language, or better make it synonymous with "jo'u".

mu'o mi'e xorxes 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.