From a.rosta@lycos.co.uk Sun Sep 22 04:15:23 2002
Return-Path: <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
X-Sender: a.rosta@lycos.co.uk
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_3); 22 Sep 2002 11:15:22 -0000
Received: (qmail 45913 invoked from network); 22 Sep 2002 11:15:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
  by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 22 Sep 2002 11:15:22 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mailbox-3.st1.spray.net) (212.78.202.103)
  by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Sep 2002 11:15:22 -0000
Received: from oemcomputer (host213-121-66-147.surfport24.v21.co.uk [213.121.66.147])
  by mailbox-3.st1.spray.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 6DDB0172A1
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Sun, 22 Sep 2002 13:15:20 +0200 (DST)
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: Sets and classes
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 12:17:02 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMEECHGJAA.a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <F197Ec6emTTY6wePnjO00002943@hotmail.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=122260811
X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin

Jorge:
> la djorden cusku di'e
> > > {zilselcmi} should cover all sets though, including the empty one.
> >
> >I think selcmi should also.
> 
> Only if it can be interpreted as {selcmi be zi'o}, which may very
> well end up being what happens.

It's a reasonable suggestion, given that (i) selcmima should
differ in meaning from se cmima, and (ii) "x1 is cardinality of
set x2" is a useful predicate.

> Perhaps the rule should be changed so that unfilled sumti places
> should by default be filled with {zi'o} rather than {zo'e}? It
> would certainly make some things more intuitive.

Ignoring the baseline violation issue, it's an interesting idea,
which would probably in and of itself improve most people's usage
a great deal. In an ideal world, though, I think it would be 
better to have the current rule, plus better (i.e. more
parsimonious) place structures, plus much greater rigour in
usage (so that place structures are actually heeded).

--And.

