Re: status of ka (was Re: [lojban] x3 of du'

[John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>]

Nick NICHOLAS wrote:

> Looks baroque to me, but that doesn't count for much. So, if I say {le ka
> xendo}, accordingly to this, I'm not speaking about being kind, or
> receiving kindness, or being a standard for kindness, but some protean
> kindness-thing which is the property of no single entity, but of every
> entity involved.

No, it is a relation (the 3-place relation between a kind person, a
recipient of kindness, and a kind behavior).  It is a reified
predicate of arity 3, just as one-ce'u leka-clauses are
reified predicates of arity 1.

According to the all-ce'u view, anyway.

> I still don't see how *every* place is ce'u, just like
> *no* place is ce'u, is any different... from du'u.

Not at all, but quite otherwise.  A ledu'u-clause is a reified
predicate of arity 0.

> If we're going to blow up {le ka xendo} like this, I'd like
> to know what precisely we're gaining.

We are losing precision and gaining diddly.  IMAO.

--
Not to perambulate             || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
   the corridors               || http://www.reutershealth.com
during the hours of repose     || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
   in the boots of ascension.  \\ Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel