[lojban] What gets into 'lo broda'

[John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com>]

In these kinds of discussions it is often a good idea to go back to the basics, in this case L-set theory.  And it turns out, not surprisingly, that xorxes intuitions are quite right, however unclear his explanations may have been.  In a set of L-sets, the internal boundaries dissolve and we get back to a union (actually the ancestral of a union): all goes back to "individuals" (L-sets without subsidiary L-sets). So the set that contained all those triples and quads that actually lifted the piano (L-sets all) turns out to be just the members of those quads and triples, as xorxes said.  

This leaves the question of how 'lo broda cu broda' is true and the answer appears to be that from the things that broda, we can extract a collection that simply is lo broda (lo broda are among the things that broda, in  pluralist terms).  This still has some problem, since members of disjoint sets that satisfied 'broda' before can now appear to form another set within the brodaers which does not, in fact, satisfy broda.  I have no idea how the semantics will puzzle this bit out, but at least the initial question about how things get into lo broda has a solid answer.


      

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.