RE: poi'i, se/te/ve ka (was Re: [jboske] sane kau?)

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

xod:
> On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Invent Yourself wrote:
> 
> > jaika provides us with an identity abstractor. {lo jaika ce'u xunre} is
> > one or more individual things that are red 
> 
> It provides us with something, but not an identity abstraction. Where did
> we go wrong? I think that jaika = seka = poi'i, but I don't think any of
> these offer an identity abstraction any more than le gerku or lo gerku
> offers the identity of the dog 

{ko'a poi'i ke'a broda} = {ko'a se ka ce'u broda} = {ko'a broda}

but {ko'a jai ka ce'u broda} is not equivalent to these. I don't
know what an 'identity abstraction' is supposed to be.

--And.