[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Re: {Archivist} Intention of gunma?

At 05:16 PM 7/2/03 -0700, you wrote: 
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 08:01:07PM -0400, Robert LeChevalier wrote:
> At 02:36 PM 7/2/03 -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> >Was the intention of the definition of gunma to allow things
> >like:
> >
> >    le cecmu cu gunma mi
> >
> >Or do we need to do things like
> >
> >    le cecmu cu gunma lu'i mi ce da
> >
> >?
> >
> >In other words, is the x2 of gunma an individual or a set or
> >either?
>
> Intension was probably not that specifically thought out, but
> looking at the cmavo list, the definition of lu'a is more
> compatible than lu'i, since it specifically mentions components of
> a mass.

That doesn't address the real question: is the x2 of gunma an
individual or a set or either?

My intent was that it be an enumeration of individuals, but I can see possible logical flaws with that position.

> Of course there are probably a zillion arguments why this is
> wrong, and the question should be put to byfy, which won't give
> you an answer right away, but it will get on the list of issues to
> be addressed.

If you're saying you don't know, then yeah, it better.

I know what I intended. I don't know if my intention will stand byfy scrutiny. Jorge and And can probably rip it apart thoroughly enough.

> (one use of request tracker that still might be appropriate for
> byfy would be as a way for people to input issues like this that
> need to be decided.  That way requestors don't need to decide
> which forum something belongs in - which should be decided by
> Nick.  See if he agrees.)

Hey, Nick. Comments?

I think Nick is gone on holiday until whenever.

lojbab

--
lojbab                                             lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA                    703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban:                 http://www.lojban.org