[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la and cusku di'e
In summary, then, the sense of the Lojban predicate *can* specify predicate-specific criteria for intrinsic boundaries, as with "nanmu", or it can leave such criteria unspecified, as with "djacu". If you use a Substance-gadri with "nanmu" then the interpretation must 'erase' the intrinsic boundaries from the meaning. If you use an Individuals-gadri with "djacu" then the interpretation must add intrinisc boundaries to the meaning. All I would add to this is that IMO Collective-gadri require criteria for intrinsic boundaries to be added or left unerased.
I agree.
> The individual/substance distinction, on the other hand, seems to > be used to describe different objects, so it is a distinction to > be made by using different selbri. There is no "apple stuff" that > corresponds directly to the set of seven apples, so if we were > to have a substance gadri it would not be related to the set in > the way other gadri work What you say here is reasonable. But the individual/substance distinction applies to every predicate, in the sense that every predicate can have an individuals-version and a substance- version. Or rather, every *sumti place* with have two versions. So if every sumti place has two versions, it is impractical to insist of as solution as ad hoc as lujvo creation. So if we were to reject making the distinction in gadri, we would need a way of doing it other than using lujvo.
Ok. But it should be a gadri that does not take inner quantifiers. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________MSN 8 limited-time offer: Join now and get 3 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU= http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_newmsn8ishere_3mf