[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Adam: > de'i li 2002-12-19 ti'u li 13:21:00 la'o zoi. And Rosta .zoi cusku di'e > > >* le/lo forces a countable interpretation > >* the gadri for Substance forces an uncountable interpretation > >* IMO, the gadri for Collective forces a countable interpretation > > another message: > > >> What I am really saying here though, which nobody is addressing, is > >> that we should reserve mass-gadri for collectives. And disambiguate > >> collectives from substances, because they are very different things > > > >I think it is premature. We should first agree on the distinctions > >and conflations we want to make. Then we can discuss how to make > >them > > I haven't read as many of the messages about this as I should have, but > anyway, if loi/lei are to be used for collectives, as some have suggested > (and I agree), then the default quantifier should be changed to be > a natural number, instead of a fraction. IM-strongly-held-O, non-pi quantifiers are compatible only with individuals-gadri, and pi-quantifiers should never be implicit. Pi-quantifiers are just a shorthand for "pagbu be". 'Individuals-gadri' = 'quantified gadri'. > It's sensible to talk about two > collectives of people, so if 'loi prenu' is a collective of people, then > 're loi prenu' should be two collectives of people No, no more than 're lo'i prenu' would mean two sets of people. 'loi prenu' is the collective of the set of all people. If you want to talk about two collectives of people, you need to use "re girzu". --And.