[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la pycyn cusku di'e
Well, suppose tht the three carry the piano three blocks: a and b carry it the first block, b and c the second and a and c the third. Surely this is lei ci nanmu carried it three blocks.
Yes, certainly. We can say {lei ci nanmu cu bevri le pipno}
or {abu joi by joi cy cu bevri le pipno}. They both mean the
same thing. We don't need to add anything to the second form.
Now subtract the three blocks: thy're just clowing around in the warehouse one afternoon and a and b pick up the piano and carry it around a bit, then b and c do, then a and c. This still seems to be a case of lei ci nanmu carrying the piano exactly as before and in this case, each submass fulfills the same condition as the whole mass.
But it is still the case that {abu joi by joi cy cu bevri le pipno}.
Saying {lei ci nanmu cu bevri le pipno} does not add anything else.
AsI said, the difference seems to be between activities and processes here. My intuition doesn't extend very reliably to states, but my first inclination isto align them with processes.
I don't understand what you're trying to show. I agree that
sometimes submasses share properties of the mass. This depends
on each case. It may even be the case that for activities
this happens more often than for processes. None of this seems
to relate to whether or not it makes sense to use
{ko'a goi lei broda} within the scope of something else.
<<
).� If we move on to {pira'eci lei ci nanmu cu bevri le pipno}
>can
>only mean {A ija B ija C}.
I think that would correspond to {su'o pira'eci lei nanmu ...}.
>>
And ordinarily {pira'eci lei nanmu} is {ro pira'eci lei nanmu}, that is, A
ije B ije C? This seems very odd.
No, no! {su'o pira'eci} means "at least one third". I've no
idea what {ro pira'eci} might mean, that one is odd indeed.
A ija B ija C won't be {su'o pira'eci} either, actually.
Every member of the mass has done the
deed by himself, but the mass has not: what happened to the additive
principle -- or does that only apply to {loi}?
Sorry, I don't get the point.
<< You'd need XOR instead if ija, however it is that we do three way XOR in Lojban. I'm assuming that fractional quantifiers are exact too, so that one third is just one third and not at least one third. >>OK --though I can't for the life of me remember how that goes -- except thatit involves repetitions of components or a device (which I can't find anywhere) for clustering sentences and then specifying properties on the whole set: "exactly one of" being the desideratum here.
I don't think we have such a device. We have {pa lu'a} to select
exactly one member of a sumti, but nothing like that for sentences,
as far as I know.
<< The second might be true, depending on context, but the first must be true. >> I think we just disagree here. I think that the first must be included in any expansion and whether the second is or not depends upon what is being expanded -- do submasses have exactly the same property as the whole mass?
I think {lei ci nanmu} is not more than {abu joi by joi cy}.
A claim about {[piro] lei ci nanmu} cannot be broken down logically
in terms of submasses like {abu joi by}. For some particular
predicates we might infer something about the submasses, but
not due to some general logical rule.
Here I do think that the OR is sufficient, since doing it a variety of ways does not seem to change matters at all, each is sufficient.
{abu joi by joi cy} is necessary and sufficient. The others
may be true circumstancially.
<< For me, a piro-mass is a simple singular term. Very easy to work with and useful. >>That is quite correct, but not the point at issue -- it is not an individualterm of the kind that allows logical operations, like instantiation or even generalization.
I don't see why not. The point at issue was what kind of things
could be assigned with {goi ko'a} without worrying about scopes.
piro-masses are an example of such things.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail