Re: [lojban-beginners] Where should I use sets and where should I use masses?

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2 September 2012 11:03, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>
> Of course, if we work under the assumption that {lo} produces the weird
> polymorphic type, then yes, you can get away with shenanigans like that,

No, I don't think "lo" can produce sets. What I'm doing is using a
different definition of "simxu" such that it does not take a set as
its x1 but just an ordinary plural reference. Instead of meaning "x1
(set) has members who mutually/reciprocally x2" I take it to just mean
"x1 mutually/reciprocally x2", bypassing the unnecessary set step. The
x1 of "simxu" is no different than the x1 of "jmaji". "jmaji" could
have been defined as "x1 (set) has members who gather/collect at
location x2 from locations that are members of x3 (set)", but what
would be the point, other than making things more complicated?

> but
> if you don't, you need an experimental in the form of a sort of JAI that can
> do afterthought LAhE in the way JAI TAG does afterthought TAG.

Right, but what's the point of having to go through a set?

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.