[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
de'i li 2002-11-06 ti'u li 17:19:00 la'o zoi. Invent Yourself .zoi cusku di'e >> A single person can be more or less >> cruel to Jim. Since we don't normally think of degrees of being inside a >> bag, that distinction collapses (probably to jei) for 'nenri le dakli'. > > > >jei can't deal with counting the number of things in the bag unless you >want to get surreal and say that 0 = empty bag, and 1 = bag contains >entire universe. I never chose to do that. > >Therefore, jei for degrees of bridi truth, and ni for counting the # of >sumti valid for the tergi'u. ni-sans-ce'u, however is more general than jei; ni-sans-ce'u can always do the work of jei, whereas jei can't always do the work of ni-sans-ce'u (at least not well). I repeat my objection to using special syntax to count things, and repeat my examples of how you can count things without ni+ce'u. >I feel like this is going in circles, the 3rd iteration or more now, and >I'd like to see some new arguments, and ones that reflect that the writer >has actually read and understood the entire thread, or I'll be reduced to >simply responding with "Go read the thread!". If people can't be bothered >to read the thread, I can't be bothered to search it and post exact URLs. >This is not aimed at you personally, Adam. But I am realizing that the >best format for this is a non-wiki web page with my views, that I can >simply point people to over and over and over again. This is hardly the only thread in which arguments get repeated over and over, even with all the participants reading the whole thread; it just seems that it particularly annoyed you this time. The Elephant is supposed to solve this, if and when it comes into being. mu'o mi'e .adam.