[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [jboske] gunma

In a message dated 2/18/2002 1:16:45 PM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:

If you say {lei gerku cu gunma ro gerku} you are saying that
the mass of dogs is a gumna to each dog. But the gi'uste
explicitly says that the x2 is not for an individual component
of the mass, but all of them taken together.

If {gunma} is a mass-component relationship, the gi'uste is wrong.
If it is between the mass and the components-as-a-mass, then
it entails x1=x2.

Your other suggestion, a "list", how would it go into Lojban?
Probably as a set, so {gunma} would be the mass-set relationship,
but again that would make the gi'uste definition wrong.

Well, that is one interpretation, but I take the "considered jointly" as part "is a mass/ team/aggregate/whole" not as modifying "components."  It makes no sense to massify a mass, you can only reasonably massify a heap or a set.  So I assume that {gunma} parallels {lu'o} and talks about a mass built on some other description od the components.  I would certainly to deny {ro gerku se gunma loi gerku}, for what else could the components be?  It is not generally required that the component list be complete in these gismu, so saying {lovi gerku se gunma loi gerku} is not false, merely incomplete.  {lo'i gerku}, on the other hand is complete, {loi gerku cu du lu'o lo'i gerku}