[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Individuals and xorlo



On 2/7/2014 6:56 AM, selpa'i wrote:
la .guskant. cu cusku di'e
    The way I see it, any {lo broda} is an individual (or an
    individual-collection). It doesn't matter what {broda} is. What
kind of
    individuals there are in {lo broda} depends on {broda}, but they are
    still always individuals. There is no difference between {lo
ckafi} and
    {lo prenu} in terms of individualness.



Do you still mean
"SUMTI is individual" =ca'e {RO DA poi ke'a me SUMTI zo'u SUMTI me DA}
with the term "individual"?

If so, keeping {lo broda} to be individual requires attentiveness on the
universe of discourse, and reduces the flexibility of the language.

Note that I said "is an individual or an individual-collection". That
is, {lo broda} can refer to one individual or to multiple individuals,
but we are always dealing in terms of individuals. It doesn't mean that
{lo broda} must be singular, it only means that whether or not it is
plural, the only referents it has are individuals.

Nora hasn't the time to read and consider this thread in depth, but she wonders whether the cmavo lu'a (and its relatives) doesn't resolve this issue. At least it was intended that these words would resolve ambiguity between individuals and the mass(es) comprised of them.

lojbab

--
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.