RE: Re: [jboske] Digest Number 136

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

Nick:
>For now, I think "countable innards = collective, uncountable 
>innards = substance" is good...

Me too.

>... but if you slice each person precisely in half, you still have a 
>substance with countable innards. Because hemi-humans are not the 
>product of the universal grinder; but they sure don't belong to any 
>notion of collective of humans, either. Hm. This is bad. We can 
>disambiguate with {poi na se cmima lo nalmulno}, but yeah, we either 
>pragmatically allow this, with only a default 'entire members', or we 
>leave the lojbanmass utterly vague, and start eyeing at the 
>alternatives (like sets for collectives -- no question that their 
>members are entire.) Yeah, this is a problem...

Not a problem, because qua countable innards they aren't remna:
"loi re broda" requires that each countable member be either a
single broda or at least some broda (more on that when I'm back in
Blighty).

--And.

When words aren't enough - Vodafone live! A new world of colour, sounds, picture messages and information on your mobile. <a href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;4909903;7724245;q?http://www.vodafone.co.uk/live";>
Click here</a> to find out more.