[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [lojban] Three more issues

At 02:52 AM 04/21/2001 +0100, And Rosta wrote:

Lojbab:
> At 10:00 PM 04/18/2001 +0100, And Rosta wrote:
> >John to Avital:
> > > > I mean, <nu prenu kei> is lo valsi, isn't it?
> > >
> > > No.
> >
> >I think this is an unresolved issue, whether or
> >not we simplify the claim to "<nu prenu kei> cu valsi"
> >(or, equivalently, "The Beatles cu prenu"). The
> >unresolved issue is whether pa valsi is a single
> >word (in which case the claim is false) or a single
> >amount of wordage (in which case the claim is true).
> >I guess usage favours the former.
>
> A single word is the smallest unit of valsi (valsi selci).  In general,
> count nouns are counts of selci, though we have examples of mass nouns that > are counted otherwise (ci birje - don't ask me what a birje selci would be). 

So are you saying that there's a rule of lojban lexical semantics
that says that when counting broda you could the smallest units of
broda, except in the case of certain specified lexical exceptions?
I would not say it is a "rule". Rather, I haven't ever contemplated any alternative. I also don't think that there are lexical exceptions, but rather that there are situations where we don't know what the smallest unit of broda is. In the case of words, we generally do know.
I think that there is a difference between "nu prenu kei" cu valsi", and "la bitlz cu prenu". The latter would expand to 4 names linked by some form of connective "and" (.e or joi or ce probably). The 3 quoted words are a unit which one cannot assume can be broken down, since order is significant. 

lojbab
--
lojbab                                             lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA                    703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban:                 http://www.lojban.org