[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
xorxes:
> la nitcion cusku di'e
>
> >cu'u la xorxes
> >
> >As one argument against Mr Doctor = loi mikce
> >
> > > >Perhaps. Like I say, though, I don't know that Mr Doctor is lo'e
> > > >mikce. In fact, I don't know yet that s/he isn't {loi mikce} after
> > > >all. Massification suppresses individuation, so the choosing of
> > > >opacity vs. transparency is sidestepped there too. Isn't it?
> > >
> > > Yes, (whole) masses are singular and thus sidestep opacity
> > > vs. transparency, but only if you were really really sick
> > > would you need the whole mass of all doctors to work on your
> > > case (and you'd have to be very rich to pay them too, I doubt
> > > any social security would cover all that)
> >
> >Sorry, but that's anti-CLL. loi = pisu'o loi ro
>
> That's why I specified _whole_ masses. If you're thinking
> of {pisu'o}, then {loi broda} is not a singular term and
> opacity is not sidestepped. Only singular terms can
> sidestep it
>
> [As a matter of fact, I'm ok with the pisu'o default for
> {loi}, but I don't think {loi broda} is a singular term
> And prefers a piro default.
It depends. If I drink pi ro loi djacu, does that mean I drink all
the water there is? Or if I have a sip, am I still drinking pi ro
loi djacu? If the latter, then I do prefer a pi ro default. If
the former, then I prefer no default. If I touch Nick, that does
not mean I touch every bit of Nick, but I don't think we can
conclude from that that reference to Nick has a default implicit
pi su'o. So my view is that masses are singulars and so their
default should be that there is no quantification.
I know this is anti-CLL, but where CLL gets it wrong we're put
in the tricky situation of having to choose between ignoring the
wrong bits of CLL or creating experimental cmavo that, in this
instance, would be exactly like loi/lei but without the defaults.
> For {lei broda}, on the other
> hand, I want and assume a {piro} default, against CLL
> This just follows the su'o-ro defaults for lo-le, and
> they are the useful ones for the same reasons.]
>
> >If one doctor cures
> >me, Mr Doctor cures me; that's Lojban baseline, and that's still my
> >starting point. In fact, this behaviour is how come we know {loi mikce}
> >is Mr Doctor, and not "a plurality of doctors". So I dispute your
> >invocation of whole masses: {loi mikce} is not {pi ro loi mikce}
>
> I agree with that last bit. On the other hand, {mi nitcu loi mikce}
> says that there is some fraction of the mass of doctors such
> that I need that fraction. Not what we want
OTOH, on my view of masses as unquantified singulars, the difference
between loi and loi'e would be:
* loi mikce is more like "I need doctors", in that it doesn't say that
the needee has the properties of a single doctor
* nitcu loi mikce is weird or vacuous if there are no mikce, but nitcu
loi'e mikce remains sensical if there are no mikce.
--And.