[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Sets etc.
From: "Adam Raizen" <araizen@newmail.net>
la xorxes cusku di'e
> la adam cusku di'e
> li'o
> I think I don't have a problem with that. So you'd be
> arguing that {le ralju be le'i pano mlatu} could only
> be one cat, whereas {le ralju be lei pano mlatu} could
> conceivably be a mass of more than one cat, it could
> be {lei xa xekri} for instance. Is that right?
I don't see why we have to freeze into the definition of ralju that
there can be only one for a given group. It sounds like
metaphysical bias to me. However "le pa ralju be le'i pano mlatu"
could only be one cat, I think, whereas "le pa ralju be lei pano
mlatu" could be a mass of more than one cat, in addition to
possibly being the ralju of only a part of the mass, for instance the
ralju of lei xa xekri. When you use a set, however, it must be the
ralju of the entire set.
co'o mi'e adam
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GET A NEXTCARD VISA, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as 2.9%
Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW!
http://click.egroups.com/1/936/2/_/17627/_/953414550/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com