From jjllambias@hotmail.com Tue Feb 29 07:36:37 2000 X-Digest-Num: 379 Message-ID: <44114.379.2094.959273826@eGroups.com> Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 07:36:37 PST From: "Jorge Llambias" Subject: Re: Use and abuse of sets la xarmuj cusku di'e >I agree wholeheartedly with la xorxes. The only actual example I have seen >of the set cmavo which is even vaguely useful is > le'i ratci barda > "The set of rats is large" > "There are many rats" >Which is much more simply and clearly expressed "so'i ratci" or something >similar. {so'i ratcu cu zasti} or else something like {lei ratcu cu so'imei} or {piro loi ratcu cu so'imei} >However, there should be a gismu for mathematical set, since this >*is* a logical language after all -- we shouldn't be forced to use lujvo. In a mathematical context you can use {se cmima} or {klesi} for mathematical sets. I don't think that being a logical language requires it to have gismu for all logical technical terms. It is a logical language because you can use it to speak logically, not because you can use it to speak easily about Logic! >An interesting thought: Since in Lojban, masses are >considered units, wouldn't the appropriate term for >a mass be {sezda'i}? Masses are units as much as sets are units. They both also happen to have members. And {simxu} is about the members of x1, be it a set or a mass. {sevzi} is not about the members of its x1. co'o mi'e xorxes ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com