[lojban] Re: A Proposed Explanation of {gunma}

[Robin Lee Powell <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 03:07:09PM -0300, Jorge Llamb?as wrote:
> On 12/8/05, Kevin Reid <kpreid@mac.com> wrote:
> > I have thought that the most sensible explanation is that the x2
> > of {gunma} is a set. Today, a discussion with Robin Lee Powell
> > and John Cowan on #lojban resulted in the following complete
> > list of conversions, which we agree is sufficient and
> > consistent:
> >
> >          x1 kind      x2 kind    relation
> >   gunma    mass       set        x2 is the set of all the parts of x1
> >   cmima    individual set        x1 is a member of x2
> >   pagbu    individual mass       x1 is a part of x2
> >   selgunma set        mass       se gunma
> >   selcmi   set        individual se cmima
> >   selpau   mass       individual se pagbu
> >
> > The other simple explanation of {gunma}, that the x2 is all of the
> > members as individuals, is incompatible with predicate logic.
> 
> Or at least with predicate logic without plural reference. But any
> treatment of masses that does not reduce them to just another
> variety of sets is on the same boat.
> 
> I would oppose redefining {gunma} in this way. 

OK.  What do you think the current definition means, then?

In particular, what sorts of things (WRT indiv, mass, set) go in the
x1 and x2?

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"
Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.