[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
xorxes:
> la djan cusku di'e
>
> > > 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
> >
> >Au contraire, I think it is exactly what we want (if we can dismiss
> >the "sundry detached doctor parts" interpretation)
>
> I don't think {loi mikce} can refer to detached doctor parts
> That has to be {loi mikce pagbu}. {loi mikce} can only be some
> doctors collectively, but only doctors, not doctor parts
A true massifier erases boundaries between individuals. A
collectivizer sees the individuals as distinct but as jointly
forming a group. Some of us think of loi/lei as a true massifier and
some of us think of it as a collectivizer.
If we don't accept this fact of divided opinion then we're
wasting our breath in discussing loi. The two understandings of loi
are each coherent, but are incompatible. The BF will have to decide
which is the true meaning of loi, and probably also how the other
one is to be expressed.
--And.