In a message dated 2/28/2002 9:35:30 AM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:Presumably {pabu} refers to the numeral "1" as much as {abu} I assume that {abu} refers to "a" and that its use as a pronoun is dependent upon that and a convention, not that it is directly a pronoun. {pabu} referring to "1" seemed a natural generalization, though pi,er now tells us that the official way is to use a mess o' MEX, {me'o pa}. The list explanation for {me'o} is more opaque than usual, could be read that way, I guess. It could also be read as not applying on the ground that {pa} is not an unevaluated mathematical _expression_. And what does {pabu} mean, then (if it is legal, as it should be)? <>And {nobu ce'o y'ybu} should refer to the sequence "0"+"'", >not a set at all. I would say that concatenation is a type of {joi}, not of {ce}. Maybe {ce'o} is the ordered version of either {joi} or {ce}, depending on context?> {jo'i} I suppose, since string are not at all like masses -- less than they are like sets, indeed -- but {jo'i} seems to be limited to mathematical critters, not symbols, and an array is more complex tha needed here (though that a sequence is a 1-array makes a kind of sense). And what does {ce'o} have to do with {ce} other than that they begin the same? So do {ce'a}, {cei}, {ce'i} and {ce'u} none of which connect well with sets, though {ce'e} does after a fashion. <I won't even ask how to define {n'} in general in Lojban...> Well, in arithmetic it is primitive, so can't be defined. But {ny ce'o y'ybu} seems about right. Specifying what it means would be harder. |