RE: sets, masses, &c. (was: RE: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautol...

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

la and cusku di'e

> That may be the best answer. Consider: a broken vase is still a vase,
> though it is less of a vase than an unbroken one, and as it gets more and
> more broken there will come a point where it ceases to count as a vase. So
> likewise, if you cut an apple in half, it can still be seen as an apple,
> albeit one with deviant shape. If you then cut 5 apples in
> half and put them in a bowl, you could then call them lei (mu)
> plise.

Right.

> OTOH if all you know is that the bowl contains 10
> apple halves, from an unknown number of apples (anywhere
> between 5 and 10), then it would follow from your position
> that these are not lei plise.

Right. They'd be {lei pano plise xadba}.

> Anyway, 2 further questions:
>
> 1. How DO you say "apple" (as in "the bowl was full of apple") in
> Lojban?

plise marji?

> 2. Why do we insist on understanding lV'i gadri to refer to pure sets
> rather than to groups/teams? What is to be gained from this?

Beats me. They are not what JCB meant by "set". But if
lo'i took over that function, what would be left for loi?

mu'o mi'e xorxes



_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com