Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: Reuse request

[Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com>]

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 5:46 AM, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
> Changes in bold:
>
> #41. lo'i mi .e la.djan. .e la snime .e la.flyfis. ku kans'iu xabju lo vu
> cmalu zdani
>

> #54. cy: xu do'o se panzi
>     by: go'i .i mi'a se panzi lo cimei noi me lo'i pa nanla .e re nixli

Grammatically you need "lu'i ... [lu'u]" in those, not "lo'i ... ku",
but I don't think sets live in houses or have (this kind of) parents.

I don't see why it needs to be "lu'i" and not "lo'i". Isn't "lo'i X" "the set of X"?
 

BTW, I'm not sure it has ever been defined whether "lu'i ko'a .e ko'e"
is the set whose elements are ko'a and ko'e and nothing else, or any
set containing ko'a and ko'e.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

I have no idea, but I fail to see how the latter is useful, especially when held in comparison to the former. It also seems to me it would be easier to extend a set restricted by default than to restrict a set extended by default.

-- 
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.