From pycyn@aol.com Sun Aug 26 05:48:17 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 26 Aug 2001 12:48:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 39331 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2001 12:48:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 26 Aug 2001 12:48:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r03.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.99) by mta3 with SMTP; 26 Aug 2001 12:48:16 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.4.) id r.92.19aa4e1e (2616) for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2001 08:48:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <92.19aa4e1e.28ba4a0c@aol.com> Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 08:48:12 EDT Subject: RE: mine, etc. To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_92.19aa4e1e.28ba4a0c_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10531 From: pycyn@aol.com --part1_92.19aa4e1e.28ba4a0c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit {me mi co'e}, while a kludge on a kludge, does work in all respects -- except for being a highly abstract formation for a basic and concrete notion. I still have a problem with {me...moi}, while liking the effect of the {me...MOI} construction generally (snowballs in Hell, surprising values, and the like) -- though without {me}, which still does not fit grammatically for all the kludging. The problem is that {moi} is for ordinals and ordinals require order (well- indeed, but partial, giving ranks rather than absolute positions, would be OK) and simple indexing does not give order of any sort. To be sure, every set can be well-ordered (given Choice) but finding the rule -- as {moi} requests -- is not always easy or even feasible. --part1_92.19aa4e1e.28ba4a0c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit {me mi co'e}, while a kludge on a kludge, does work in all respects -- except
for being a highly abstract formation for a basic and concrete notion.

I still have a problem with {me...moi}, while liking the effect of the
{me...MOI} construction generally (snowballs in Hell, surprising values, and
the like) -- though without {me}, which still does not fit grammatically for
all the kludging. The problem is that {moi} is for ordinals and ordinals
require order (well- indeed, but partial, giving ranks rather than absolute
positions, would be OK) and simple indexing does not give order of any sort.
To be sure, every set can be well-ordered (given Choice) but finding the
rule -- as {moi} requests -- is not always easy or even feasible. --part1_92.19aa4e1e.28ba4a0c_boundary--