Re: Use and abuse of sets

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

la xarmuj cusku di'e

>I agree wholeheartedly with la xorxes. The only actual example I have seen
>of the set cmavo which is even vaguely useful is
>	le'i ratci barda
>	"The set of rats is large"
>	"There are many rats"
>Which is much more simply and clearly expressed "so'i ratci" or something
>similar.

{so'i ratcu cu zasti} or else something like {lei ratcu cu so'imei}
or {piro loi ratcu cu so'imei}

>However, there should be a gismu for mathematical set, since this
>*is* a logical language after all -- we shouldn't be forced to use lujvo.

In a mathematical context you can use {se cmima} or {klesi}
for mathematical sets. I don't think that being a logical
language requires it to have gismu for all logical technical
terms. It is a logical language because you can use it to
speak logically, not because you can use it to speak easily
about Logic!

>An interesting thought: Since in Lojban, masses are
>considered units, wouldn't the appropriate term for
>a mass be {sezda'i}?

Masses are units as much as sets are units. They both
also happen to have members. And {simxu} is about the
members of x1, be it a set or a mass. {sevzi} is not
about the members of its x1.

co'o mi'e xorxes


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com