On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 09:46:48PM +1100, Nick Nicholas wrote:
> (resend)
didn't get the first...hrm
[...]
> Similarly, you can say
>
> mi citka pi ro loi rismi
>
> and mean half now and half later. Bzzt, your collective instantly
> evaporates. you've split the rice in two, you're not eating it all
> together at the same time.
Ok, you had me till here. I think this is bogus. What is the "same
time"? In some ma'i it is within a few minutes, in others it is
within the two days. But you *never* eat it all at precisely the
same time. If you require that as part of it being a "collective",
then collectives are worthless.
So i'm still not convinced that "piro" isn't what you want. Maybe
a clearer definition of "collective" could be given though?
[...]
> When I say the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra is playing, who do I mean?
> (We're talking English now.)
This is a "la" thing though. It's the name of a mass which has
changing members. Saying it at any given point in time means that
some of the current members of the orchestra were playing. I don't
think it would be false if one flautist is home sick, so I would
map it to "la", naming a mass which we assume is quantified with
"pisu'o".
[...]
> There may well be an utterly obvious gismu I'm missing; if there is,
> I'll consider retracting my support of {lu'oi}, in the interests of
> fundamentalism. Ball's back in whoever's court.
I wouldn't be overly opposed to this if I could get a clear definition
of collective so that I could see if it isn't "piro", and if this
is all people wanted. But from my hardly-paying-attention-perspective
it seemed that AndR was discussing complete overhauls of the gadri
system---replacing le with lu'oirolau'ifoobyfoo or whatever crap,
and making it unable to refer to multiple individuals, or whatever
else it was.
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
pgp00100.pgp
Description: PGP signature