Re: [lojban] Re: Language of Logic and Logical Language.

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

le nanmu poi claxu lo'e selnelrai skari cu cusku di'e

> Would you mind elaborating on this? How does Lojban have an
> obligatory singular-plural distinction?

The usual claim is that Lojban doesn't have obligatory
tense and number. This is true enough for tense. You have
but to look at any Lojban text and chances are that most
sentences won't be marked by tense. Tense is not obligatory
and it is very easy to avoid. But when it comes to number...
First, you cannot avoid having to choose an article/quantifier
for most sumti. This choice is extremely intertwined with
the singular-plural distinction. Then {le} and {lei} are the
only gadri for which the singular-plural distinction could be
avoided. But look at any Lojban text and try to find a bare
{le broda} that refers to more than one broda, or a {lei broda}
that refers to a single broda. You won't find them easily.
So my contention is that to put on the same level non-obligatory
tense in Lojban with non-obligatory number is misleading.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp