gadri schon wieder mal

[Nick Nicholas <opoudjis@optushome.com.au>]

You know, I really should be going over my backlog of jboske. But my 
backlog of jboske is close to 1000 messages; and I'm serious that I 
cannot keep doing this. Bob just mused that jboske is SW and wonderful. 
No, Bob. jboske is a load of shite, precisely because we either don't 
know what we're talking about, or can't communicate what we do know to 
anyone else. My sleep is shot, my work is shot, I didn't sign up for 
this, and I'm not going to stick around for this.

And what's galling me the most is that there are, what, five different 
debates going on at the same time? And one human being is meant to tune 
in to all of them? And extract sense out at the end? And this is 
helping?!

Well vented. Now then.

Masses and groups are different. Masses are basic by definition. loi 
stays a mass. Groups get a LAhE cmavo.

Anything overtly derived from a population gets a LAhE cmavo, because 
that explicitly signals derivation.

I reject And's conflation of Mode and Prototype: they are not the same, 
and to conflate them only exacerbates confusion, precisely because they 
are so similar. Prototype and Generic are pretty similar too; and both 
are similar to Mass; but we're not going to conflate them either.

Therefore, Statistical Singularisations go to LAhE. loi stays as the 
intermediate singularisation between subjective and objective: it is 
the prototype, the mental construct people use as a definition of a 
Kind. This accords with founder intent. It matches CLL (though so does 
Statistical Singularisation); and it probably doesn't break usage 
pre-Jorge too much. It also makes a satisfying partner to le'e: our 
common English understanding of 'stereotype' is as a mental construct, 
precisely as prototypes are. To make lo'e Statistical or Unique would 
compromise our intuition for stereotype.

I kind of get And's Unique; I just don't get the point of it. And, 
*please* give me either test phrases where the Unique claims something 
different from the Prototype and the Mass, or a sentence of English 
where the different cmavo would give a different rendering.

I don't get the point of it, but I do get that for it to work, it has 
to be basic. So no LAhE for it; it gets a gadri. And that gadri shall 
not be lo'ei, because we need something distinctive.

.... Shit, And sends a post on the same topic.

So lau'a is what, a Kind? A generic? How is lo not non-specific, rather 
than specificity neutral? Feel free to answer, but for now I'm ignoring 
it.

The collectiviser is what would distinguish groups from masses? OK, 
we'll keep that. The paraphrase will be gumna or something like that: 
emphasis on jointless, whereas masses are an emphasis on sludge.

Average: I'm taking the derive statistical ones to LAhE, so I accept 
that. I still contend that by founder intent, lo'e shall be prototype, 
and prototypes are underived categories: they are not extrapolated from 
lo'i broda: they *define* lo'i broda.

Unique: You're allowing it be derived? Hey, you're the one who gets it; 
if you can like with it as a LAhE, that's OK by me.

... so we're mostly in agreement about the grid.

You're claiming loi is a mass but lei is a group? You'll have to 
explain that some day, but not today.

You're refusal to count what we know is unique is still bogus to me, 
but if you want to think of la as Unique Named rather than Individual 
Named, go ahead.

Stereotype lies outside your paradigm. No surprise prototype would as 
well.

OK. We're not in agreement, but we are in compromise. Oh, and when the 
cmavo get assigned, believe me, they ain't gonna be lu'oi lu'ei lu'ai. 
There's nothing distinctive about them; they can't be learned.

---
DR NICK NICHOLAS. nickn@unimelb.edu.au
FRENCH & ITALIAN, UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA.
In Athens, news spreads fast: they know everything as soon as it 
happens,
sometimes before it happens, and often without it happening at all.
--- Jean Psichari, _My Voyage_. http://www.opoudjis.net