Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: loi preti be fi lo nincli zo'u tu'e

From: "Jorge Llambias" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 05:04:54 +0000

la camgusmis cusku di'e

>Unfortunately, that doesn't fix the general set problems. In
>particular, if we have:
>
>le pamoi gerku ce remoi gerku ce cimoi gerku ku ku'a le remoi gerku ce
>vomoi gerku

Those are: le(((pamoi (gerku ce remoi)) (gerku ce cimoi)) gerku)
and le((remoi (gerku ce vomoi)) gerku)

You need a few explicit brackets to get the grouping you want.

>While I'm at it, does anyone see a difference between
>
>le pamoi gerku ce remoi gerku ce cimoi gerku ku ku'a le remoi gerku ce
>vomoi gerku
>
>and
>
>le pamoi gerku ku ce le remoi gerku ku ce le cimoi gerku ku ku'a le
>remoi gerku ku ce le vomoi gerku
>
>? (The latter having a lot more ku). I'm pretty sure they're
>equivalent, but I want to check.

I'm not at all sure what the first one means, even after fixing
the grouping. Why should {lo broda ce brode} refer to a set
with two elements? My first guess for {broda ce brode} would
be "x1 is the set of all broda and all brode", but then what
about the x2 of brode for example, does it survive? These
tanru connectives are usually very odd.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail