On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com> wrote:The disadvantage of defining "simxu" and "cmima" that way, is that you
>
> Sets are required in some places in lojban, such as simxu1 and cmima2 (these
> relationships don't actually involve the underlying properties of the
> elements of the set)
>
> e.g. lo'i ro jbopre cu simxu lo ka ce'u slabu ce'u -> All lojbanists know
> each other.
> e.g. ko cmima lo'i jbopre -> Join the lojbanists!
can't easily say things like:
lo ro jbopre cu zvati ti gi'e simxu lo ka ce'u slabu ce'u
All lojbanists are here and know each other.
I don't see any advantage to defining "simxu" and the few other gismu
that are defined that way in terms of sets, so I use them as if they
were defined in a more user-friendly manner, in terms of ordinary
groups rather than mathematical sets.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
--
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.