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

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Jacob Errington <nictytan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> latro'a and I have a strict(er) view of Lojban in that regard and believe
> than simxu1 must be a set, and that the simxu action is fully pairwise.

But in what sense does that definition make Lojban more strict? Are
you saying that a predicate with the more vague meaning is simply not
a possible predicate in your strict version of Lojban?

> {mi
> ce do simxu lo ka cinba} therefore has the obvious meaning. Likewise, {lo'i
> nanmu ce lo'i ninmu cu simxu lo ka cinba} (I'm using ce as a cheap set
> addition because I can't be bothered to really look up how to do it)

Set union is "jo'e" (but maybe that's not what you want either). "ce"
would create a set whose two members are each a set.

>doesn't
> mean that all the men kissed all the women and vice-versa; it means that
> each of the men kissed each of the women and also *was kissed* by each of
> them. That would be my intended interpretation of that, for instance.

And also each men kissed and was kissed by each of the other men,
right? Otherwise you don't want the union there but something more
complicated. If you don't include the same sex kissing pairs, that
wouldn't match ianek's interpretation.

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.