lo simxu

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

There was a semi-consensus at some point that lo simxu
could be a set or a mass. The proposed distinction was
that {mi ce do ce ta simxu le ka ce'u ce'u tavla}

means:

    mi do tavla
    ije do mi tavla
    ije mi ta tavla
    ije ta mi tavla
    ije do ta tavla
    ije ta do tavla

whereas {mi joi do joi ta simxu le ka ce'u ce'u tavla}
is not so strictly exhaustive, more like {mi joi do joi ta
tavla mi joi do joi ta}.

The benign effect of this convention would be to kill the
use of sets with simxu, because we practically never want
the exhaustive combinatorics meaning. {le tavla simxu cu
klama le zarci} is meaningful to me, but it makes no sense
if {lo simxu} is construed as a set, because sets don't
go to stores.

mu'o mi'e xorxes





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