From pycyn@aol.com Fri Mar 01 17:41:44 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: unknown); 2 Mar 2002 01:41:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 57270 invoked from network); 2 Mar 2002 01:41:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m11.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 2 Mar 2002 01:41:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m09.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.164) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Mar 2002 01:41:43 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id r.199.31114e6 (18708) for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 20:41:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <199.31114e6.29b187d4@aol.com> Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 20:41:40 EST Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [jboske] RE: Anything but tautologies To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_199.31114e6.29b187d4_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 118 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001 X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra --part1_199.31114e6.29b187d4_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/1/2002 2:56:38 PM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: > >But is a mass of text a text? > > Some masses of texts, sure. Maybe even all masses, can you > think of a case where it wouldn't be? > I would like to see an example. The mass of texts in my library is not obviously a text. What does it collaborate to do or have done to it that clearly marks it as a text? <>A mass of dogs is not a dog. Almost always not. A mass of one dog is a dog. No set of dogs is a dog.> Well, I agree to the second part and can at least make sense of the first part, though I think that the mass of a single dog is different from the dog itself -- and certainly from any other dog, so not a dog at all. Since that seems to be the question I'm asking, how are these critters related, this hardly helps any. I can can do circles on my own -- but can you all break out of yours? <>This seems to add a new wrinkle to an already confusing (if >not confused) situation, since capital letters have different letteral >words. Yes, but who uses those strange shifted letteral words? What are they for?> Well, you seem to use them in preference to the lower case ones at this point, for one thing. You just don't refer to them correctly. --part1_199.31114e6.29b187d4_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/1/2002 2:56:38 PM Central Standard Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:


>But is a mass of text a text?

Some masses of texts, sure. Maybe even all masses, can you
think of a case where it wouldn't be?


I would like to see an example.  The mass of texts in my library is not obviously a text.  What does it collaborate to do or have done to it that clearly marks it as a text?

<>A mass of dogs is not a dog.

Almost always not. A mass of one dog is a dog.
No set of dogs is a dog.>

Well, I agree to the second part and can at least make sense of the first part, though I think that the mass of a single dog is different from the dog itself -- and certainly from any other dog, so not a dog at all.

<A is to abu as 1 is to pa.>

Since that seems to be the question I'm asking, how are these critters related, this hardly helps any.  I can can do circles on my own -- but can you all break out of yours?

<>This seems to add a new wrinkle to an already confusing (if
>not confused) situation, since capital letters have different letteral
>words.

Yes, but who uses those strange shifted letteral words? What
are they for?>

Well, you seem to use them in preference to the lower case ones at this point, for one thing.  You just don't refer to them correctly.





 --part1_199.31114e6.29b187d4_boundary--