Re: [lojban] "we" and masses. A bug in the CLL?

[la arxokuna <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>]

On Sunday, June 16, 2013 5:04:08 PM UTC+4, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Saturday, June 15, 2013 22:11:01 la arxokuna wrote:
> > However, jvs <http://jbovlaste.lojban.org/dict/mi%27o> has two definitions,
> > the second one (by selpahi) defining  {mi'o} as "mi jo'u do" entered in
> > December 2012. I don't remember any discussions of this issue at that time.
> > 
> > I don't know if  it should be  {ro mi'o bevri} vs. {lu'o mi'o bevri}  or
> > {ro lu'a mi'o bevri} vs. {lu'o mi'o bevri}.
> > 
> > So should we change the CLL to say it means {jo'u}, not {joi}?
>
> Lojban lacks grammatical number, even in pronouns, but has clusivity. I 
> thought they were ambiguous as to whether they mean individuals or masses; if 
> you want to specify, you can say "lu'o" or "lu'a".

So I think we now all agree that we have to put this to the CLL Errata page.

 

> Pierre
> -- 
> ve ka'a ro klaji la .romas. se jmaji

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.