[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la xod cusku di'e
mi puza cilre bai noda .i ji'a mi puzi speni bai noda .i ji'a mi ca'o bai gunka
No, even in that context I can't interpret it as {bai noda}.
It's always {bai zo'e}, and {zo'e} can't be {noda}.
You wrote:
"In other words, {fi'o jdima} tags a price obvious from context or
unimportant...."
Ok, I meant it the way a zo'e-filled place may indicate that the value that fills that place is unimportant. Not worth mentioning, even though it has to be something.
Prices are a domain. The price of an object is a variable. Both are appropriate for le selfancu.
I don't think I can explain any further to you the difference
that I see between a variable and the value that a variable takes,
we've already been through this more than once, so I just give
up on my attempts. You keep using {fancu} the way you do, I will
keep avoiding it.
> le selfancu: a value in the domain > le terfancu: a value in the range A function that only maps one point to another is not very useful! Do you want me to state a new bridi for every point in the domain?
You can talk of many values in the same bridi. Even of all the values in a range, that's what quantifiers are for.
> As for x4, you just put {li pa} there, which suggests that
> you are also using it for the value in the range. Something
> like "the function called x1 maps x2 (a value in the range)
> to x3=x4 (a value in the domain)". Unless you meant to use
> {li pa} not to refer to the number 1, but rather to the
> function that maps any value of the range to the number 1.
Yes, that's how lipa should be interpreted when in the le velfancu place.
I see, but that's not how I understand the language. {li pa}
for me is the number 1, not a function that takes the number
1 as a value.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com