Re: [lojban] pro-sumti question In-Reply-To F2597BBJXLGV0KTqQk900006d70@hotmail

[pycyn@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/6/2002 5:07:40 PM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:

, every predicate probably has its own rules (place structures tend to
>be
>different), but that hardly seems a reason to say there are no rules.  But
>it
>is a good reason to put those rules in the dictionary.

Well, a special rule for every occasion sounds very close
to no rules to me. I was not able to write a general rule for
the weight case that would apply to a class of properties.

What an odd thing to say -- the fact that we have a lot of rules means there are NO rules?  There may not be any of great generality, but there is a rule that covers each case.  And of course, the case about weights -- if there are other cases like it, ice-cream-eating, say -- can be covered by a general rule ("add numerical quantities") and a rather trivial guide to tell in what place (very remote in the ice cream case) that quantity is located (something for machines, not humans, obviously).
To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.