On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Ilmen <ilmen.pokebip@gmail.com> wrote:• http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section:+gadri
piPA [sumti] = lo piPA si'e be pa me [sumti]
• http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+Numeric+selbri
cmavo: si'e (MOI)
Proposed Definition
Converts a number, lerfu-string or ME-converted sumti into a tanru-unit. The place structure in the case of a number is "x1 is/are a [number]th of x2". In general for any sumti the place structure is "x1 is a part/fraction of x2, quantified by [number/lerfu/sumti]".
Isn't there a contradiction between the proposed expansion for {pi PA [sumti]} and the definition of {si'e}?
Shouldn't the former be {pi PA [sumti] = lo me li pa fe'i PA me'u si'e be...}, or something like that?The definitions are horribly worded, but "pi mu" is supposed to be one half, or five tenths, not one fifth, and "pi mu si'e" is like "xadba".Besides, isn't it weird that {pi ro ko'a} has a different meaning from {pa ko'a}?"pi ro ko'a" ("the whole of ko'a") only really makes sense when ko'a is one (and if ko'a happen to be many I think "pi ro" forces a one group interpretation so that a whole can make sense. OTOH, "pa ko'a" ("one of ko'a") only really makes sense when ko'a are more than one, and it's weird if not meaningless when ko'a is one. I would say that when ko'a is one, "pa ko'a" forces a multiplication of ko'a into instances or such.A better definition for "pi PA ko'a" might be something like "lo pi PA si'e be ko'a noi pi ro ke'a pa mei"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.