[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
xod: > On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, And Rosta wrote: > > xod: > > > We are conflating substance-nouns with nouns that exhibit emergent > > > properties by using lei for both of them. This doesn't help us, and in > > > fact, I see no reason why Lojban needs a substance gadri at all. We can > > > very easily refer to any quantity of beans or ice with le > > > > If "lo birje" is "a beer", then we need a way to say plain "beer" > > Why? lo birje is a beer, or it's some beer. I don't see why substance > quantities need to be distinguished from individuals. The only difference > is that, with individuals, we often agree on the amount that makes up an > individual (how many pounds of doctor make a Doctor), whereas the size of > "a beer" is more debatable If lo birje is a beer but not some beer, then the Lojban distinction between lo birja and loi birja (or whatever the substance gadri is if not beer) is not vacuous. It isn't vacuous for lo prenu and loi prenu, and it would be nice if Lojban did what it claimed to do and didn't make a distinction between mass nouns and count nouns, so that lo gives a count interpretation and loi gives a mass (substance) interpretation. > > Massifiers erase individuating boundaries, and that's what we need > > here > > > > I agree that we have been conflating massification with collectivization > > (groups with emergent properties). I intend to distinguish them by > > using lu'o for the massifier and lu'oi for the collectivizer. Hopefully > > the BF will also distinguish them somehow > > Hopefully we will reserve mass gadri for emergent masses, and continue the > process of the erasure of the individual/substance distinction that Lojban > started I don't understand the second half of this sentence. If we look at predicates like prenu, then it can be individuated with lo, or treated as a substance by loi (or whatever the substance gadri is). If lo birja isn't only "a beer", then it would seem that Lojban treats birja and prenu differently, the latter being individuable and the former not. --And.