Re: [lojban] Re: A (rather long) discussion of {all}

["Maxim Katcharov" <maxim.katcharov@gmail.com>]

On 6/3/06, Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/3/06, Maxim Katcharov <maxim.katcharov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > What /is/ the relationship between the referring expression and the objects?
>
> That would be {sinxa}, "x1 refers to x2":
>
>     lu le tadni li'u cu sinxa le tadni
>     The expression {le tadni} refers to the students.
>
> > First there's the relationship between the students and the hats.
>
> That one is {dasni}, "x1 wears x2":
>
>    le tadni cu dasni le mapku
>    The students wear the hats.

Yes

> > Then, there's the relationship between the students and the building.
>
> That one is {sruri}, "x1 surrounds x2":
>
>    le tadni cu sruri le dinju
>    The students surround the building.

Yes

> > I
> > want to know the relationship between *Alice* and the surroundment of
> > the building.
>
> That one might be {pagbu}, "x1 is a part of x2":
>
>     la alis cu pagbu lo nu sruri le dinju
>     Alice is part of the surrounding of the building.

"-ment" was used in the sense of "act" and not in the sense of "event":

...the relationship between Alice and the "surrounding of the
building" (i.e. the predicatation)

> > Mass: Alice is part of the composite entity that surrounds the building
>
> That might be:
>
>     la alis cu pagbu lo gunma dacti poi sruri le dinju
>     Alice is part of the composite object that surrounds the building.

Sure, though you don't need dacti. Alternatively:

 da poi sruri le dinju cu gunma la alis
 That which surrounds the building is a mass that includes Alice as a component

> > So, what is the relationship between Alice and the building?
>
> Probably {mlana}, "x1 is to the side of x2":
>
>    la alis cu mlana le dinju
>    Alice is to the side of the building.
>
> > Or the
> > surroundment of the building? (Alice being one of the 26 students that
> > surround it.)
>
>    la alis me pa le re xa tadni poi sruri le dinju
>    Alice is one of the 26 students that surround the building.

Are the relationships "26 students surround the building" and "26
students wear hats" different in any way? There is a distinct
difference between how "26 students" is used in the former, and how it
is used in the latter (even if the referent is the same), yes?

If so, then in exactly what way does your response describe a
relationship between Alice and the surroundment of the building that
is in any way different from the Alice's wearing of a hat?

 la alis me pa le re xa tadni poi dasni le mapku
 Alice is one of the 26 students that wear a hat

You've rephrased, but the same question applies: what is the
distinction between "bunch, individually" and "bunch, together"? Is it
possible to describe "bunch, together" in a way that explains how it
is distinct from "bunch, individually", or "mass"?


Mass: Alice is part of the composite entity that surrounds the building

Bunch, individually: We are not treating Alice this way, so this does
not apply. (If this were the hat example: Alice, herself, wears one+
of the bunch of hats implied by the blank inner of {lo mapku})

Bunch, together (but not in the sense of mass or group): Alice's
relationship to the surrounding of the building is ???


What is the difference between the latter two relationships?