In le selcmi be ro selcmi poi ke'a na cmima ke'a as a translation of "The set of all sets which aren't members of themselves", I ran into a question about set gadri. If I have "le selcmi", the sumti already refers to a set (individually), right? Is it neccesary to use "le'i selcmi"? Or would "le'i selcmi" actually mean something else? (ba'a: le'i selcmi == piro le'i su'o selcmi == the whole of the set of some sets?). Which leads me to my next question. If the above is correct, is it better to say something more like: le'i ro selcmi poi ke'a na cmima ke'a or even the traji concise: lo'i selcmi be na'ebo ri I'm liking the last one at this point (but not entirely sure if it's correct use of set operators). Also; I'm not sure if that ri works properly; I know ri looks back to the first "complete" sumti, so perhaps that wouldn't work there... Can ya use ke'a in a be? If so then perhaps lo'i selcmi be na'ebo ke'a would fix the ri problem... Anyone have a better suggestion for the translation? -- Jordan DeLong fracture@allusion.net
Attachment:
pgp00040.pgp
Description: PGP signature