[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la and cusku di'e
The difference here, though, is that the non-animals can't be seen as animals by adding a criterion of animalhood and the animals can be seen as non-animals by erasing a criterion of animalhood.
Lojbab said he had no trouble seeing sofas as animals, and John
has no problem with teddy bears as {cribe}, so a danlu-gadri
might be useful for them.
How, then, do we talk about things that are "broda with the addition of intrinsic boundaries" and "broda with the subtraction of intrinsic boundaries"?
For addition, nothing is needed because every broda is always
countable in Lojban. We all agree about {re djacu} implying
contextual boundaries. (This applies as much to distributive
as to collective reference.)
For the subtraction of boundaries, we can use "Unique".
Substance is always a subtype of Unique anyway, isn't it?
If there is only one member, the idea of boundaries between
members loses its meaning. So {lo'e djacu} works well for
"water" as substance:
le botpi e le kabri cu vasru lo djacu
The bottle contains a (=some) water and
the glass contains a (=some) water.
le botpi e le kabri cu vasru lo'e djacu
There is water in the bottle and in the glass.
Subtle difference, but the second one says that the bottle
and the glass contain the same stuff while the first one says
that each contains a water (there is a different water in
each container).
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