From jjllambias@hotmail.com Thu Jul 04 11:11:06 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 4 Jul 2002 18:11:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 49332 invoked from network); 4 Jul 2002 18:11:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 Jul 2002 18:11:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.28) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Jul 2002 18:11:06 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 11:11:06 -0700 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 04 Jul 2002 18:11:06 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] pro-sumti question Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2002 18:11:06 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Jul 2002 18:11:06.0615 (UTC) FILETIME=[2A8B3070:01C22386] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la djorden cusku di'e >Umm; I don't think it's important how many dogs or mlatu there was. Using >the remei to describe instead of reusing a previous description should be >enough to show that we're talking about a pair of sumti (not a pair of dogs >or a pair of cats or a pair of dog+cat). What do you mean by "sumti"? There are two uses for this word. In one case, it is used for a grammatical class, in another, for the referents of that grammatical construction. If the cats and the dogs are the sumti of the first sentence, then a pair of those sumti is a pair of animals. If {le remei} is not a pair of animals, then I don't see how it could get tired, since grammatical constructions should not get tired. {le remei} clearly has to be a pair of animals in this example. If {le mlatu} and {le gerku} refer to more than one cat and one dog, or to an unknown number, then I suggest using {le romei} instead. That should always work for a general "they". >The explicit version would be > le sumti smuni se remei > the pair of sumti referents >but there's no need to be that accurate as the listener could likely get >that anyway. Check again the definition of {mei} you're using. The x1 is a mass. The rest is a mess. (Fortunately one can just ignore it. My ideal definition for {mei} would be x1 is an n-some of x2, i.e. x1 is a sub-mass of x2 of cardinality n. For example {lo 12mei be loi sovda} would be a dozen eggs.) mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com