[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Adam Raizen wrote: > 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). True. > 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. Take it up with John Cowan. But I do find ni+ce'u to be more intuitive than BAI and similar hacks. -- "In the Soviet Union, government controls industry. In the United States, industry controls government. That is the principal structural difference between the two great oligarchies of our time." -- Edward Abbey