RE: [lojban] "generic Odysseys"

[And Rosta <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>]

>>> michael helsem <graywyvern@hotmail.com> 11/12/01 03:55pm >>>
>From: And Rosta <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>
#>"le" would mean
#>"each of certain specific versions of Michael Helsem".
#
#le purci prenrmaiku goiko'a .i
#le balvi prenrmaiklu goiko'e .i
#le steci be le prenrmaiklu cu ve jmine ko'a cezo'e ce ko'e

What is {jmine}? It can't be "jmive", because that has no x4.
cmima? I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

Oh hang on. "jmina". So: "Each of certain things specific to
each of certain things that are prenrmaiklu are the result of
adding together a certain yestermichael, a certain morrowmichael,
etc." I still don't get it. "lo'i prenrmaiklu cu ve jmina ko'a cezo'e 
ce ko'e" would make sense, but I don't get what the 
"le steci be le prenrmaiklu" means.

#i can't see "lo'e prenrmaiklu" being other than "le cnano befi
#le prenrmaiklu" taking the latter as the set of "ko'a bi'i ko'e".

Yes, well, among the various mooted interpretations of {lo'e}, one
of the viable ones is the 'statistical average' interpretation. I prefer
to go with an interpretation that subsumes the statistical average
as just one way of conceptualizing a category as singleton.

#and that really has a use with "cnano leka cerni" for example,
#if someone who only sees me at the same hour every day wanted to
#discuss my morning manifestation (grouchiness, just-showered
#dampness)...

"is normal in each of certain properties of morning" (not sure if x2 of cnano is the property that it is normal to have, or the property that one is normal
relative to) -- I glork what you mean, though.

So anyway, okay, your idea of lo'e is narrower than mine, but if you
define a predicate meaning "is Michael Helsem", which you, yestermichael,
and morrowmichael all have, I still don't get your answer to how to
use that predicate to refer unambiguously to The One and Only Michael
Helsem....

--And.