[lojban-beginners] Re: Quick questions

["Matt Arnold" <matt.mattarn@gmail.com>]

On the IRC channel, we were recently discussing that. I suggested that
if {pi} is completely universal, then isn't it part of the definition
of {si'e}? And that therefore {pi} never needs to be included because
it would be redundant?

-Matt

On 12/15/06, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/15/06, Matt Arnold <matt.mattarn@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If I understand {si'e} correctly,
> > {pasi'e} means "x1 is the first portion of mass/totality x2",
> > {resi'e} means "x1 is the second portion of mass/totality x2",
> > {rosi'e} means "x1 is all portions of mass/totality x2",
> > {su'osi'e} means "x1 is at least some portions of mass/totality x2".
> > {so'esi'e} means "x1 is most of the portions of mass/totality x2".
>
> The ma'oste definition is a bit confusing, but the idea with {si'e} is that
> it takes fractions, not integers:
>
>  fi'uresi'e = pimusi'e: "x1 is half of x2"
>  fi'ucisi'e = picira'esi'e: "x1 is a third of x2"
>  fi'uvosi'e = piremusi'e: "x1 is a quarter of x2"
>  ...
>  pisu'osi'e: "x1 is some fraction of x2"
>  piso'esi'e: "x1 is most of x2"
>  piso'asi'e: "x1 is almost all of x2"
>  pirosi'e: "x1 is all/the whole of x2"
>
> mu'o mi'e xorxes