[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
| In a message dated 11/4/2002 8:40:07 PM Central Standard Time, a.rosta@hidden.email writes: << I've only very recently been thinking about this, but my current thinking >> Well, it is clearly not required that every member -- or any -- be a broda, another (unfortunate) feature of e-gadri. Nor is it required that there be a defining property -- you just pick 'em out somehow. << But, otoh, {le'i ro broda} would be an i-defined set, tho again with the defining property unspecified. This is because cardinality ro allows for cardinality 0. A 0-cardinality subset of lo'i broda cannot be defined extensionally, so it must be defined intensionally. >> I don't suppose the size of the set (that is, the internal quantiier) affects how the set is selected. And, of course, in Lojban as opposed to Andban and Llamban perhaps, {ro} does not allow 0 -- this is logic after all (16.8(399)). And, defining a set with cardinality 0 extensionally, were it allowed, would be a snap: don't pick anything. |