From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Fri Jul 14 19:38:01 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29941 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2000 02:38:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m3.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Jul 2000 02:38:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO relay3-gui.server.ntli.net) (194.168.4.200) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Jul 2000 02:38:00 -0000 Received: from m3-mp1-cvx1c.gui.ntl.com ([62.252.12.3] helo=andrew) by relay3-gui.server.ntli.net with smtp (Exim 3.03 #2) id 13DHgr-0004NZ-00 for lojban@egroups.com; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 03:28:29 +0100 To: "Lojban List" Subject: RE: [lojban] Re: zi'o & otpi Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 03:37:59 +0100 Message-ID: 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: <4.2.2.20000711073544.00b0d4a0@127.0.0.1> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" Lojbab: > At 08:17 PM 07/10/2000 +0200, Elrond wrote: [...] > >I postulate that the "dog breed" is a rather simple concept that *should* > >be allowed not to need actual dogs to be thought about. I might be wrong, > >and thinking actually about "gerku girzu" instead of "se gerku". (se) gerku is a relation between dog and breed. So while I agree dog breeds needn't 'contain' actual dogs, such a dog breed cannot be described by zi'oless {(se) gerku}. > > The answer is that "dog breed" the English phrase is MORE THAN ONE concept > that in Lojban must be expressed in more than one way depending on what it > is you are trying to say. Lojban allows finer distinctions in meaning than > English does, in its pursuit of one word/one meaning and that pretty much > assures that there will be aspects of most every English word that cannot > all be covered by one Lojban word. > > If this is constraining, then it is an intended constraining. > > Again, to me, a dog breed that has no dogs is not really a dog breed at > all, but something similar to a dog breed, or of the form of a dog breed or > having the properties of a dog breed. In modern parlance it is probably a > set of traits, or perhaps a particular range of the dog genome. However it > is you are defining this thing that is not quite a dog breed because it > does not have any dogs in it, you would choose a different Lojban word to > express that different definition - a definition that does not include an > association with one or more potential dogs. (Remember that a Lojban place > can be filled with a potential sumti, so claiming that there is nothing > that fills the dog place means not only that there is no dog in that breed > but that there cannot potentially be a dog in that breed). Have you forgotten that this thread has been about whether "se gerku be zi'o" is sensical? Elrond (platonist like me) was (I think) replying to those who said it wasn't. Your reply can basically be read as endorsing his reply. --And.