[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
pycyn@hidden.email scripsit:
> Let's see. I agree that {le'i} should be able to be {le'i no} -- the empty
> set I pick out (typically what set I am thinking of it as a subset to).
I think this is rooted in a misunderstanding. "le'i broda" is not the
set I have in mind, but the (veridical) set of the things that I have
in mind. The former would be le se cmima etc. That being the case,
there is only one empty set (whereas intensionally there might be
many descriptions of it), and it cannot be the set of zero in-mind things,
because you cannot have no things in mind: le'i no broda is as bad
as le no broda.
> That may be right, but my recollection is that it was picked in the belief
> (over my objection, of course) that {ro} included 0.
I certainly didn't think so when I was writing CLL.
--
John Cowan jcowan@hidden.email
At times of peril or dubitation, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Perform swift circular ambulation, http://www.reutershealth.com
With loud and high-pitched ululation.