[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Let me play Devil's Advocate (i.e. Fundamentalist's Advocate) and offer some definitions of lojbanmass. Condition: Lojbanmass must be consistent with whatever CLL and the wordlists say about it. Definition: X is a lojbanmass iff X is a single countable broda, or X is a Group of broda or X is broda Substance There is a potential problem with the definition in that after loi/lei, inner PA when implicit is ro and not tu'o; i.e. loi/lei force a Collective reading, yet I think the CLL intention is that they should be able to do Substance. So we need to add the following: Addendum: If X is a lojbanmass with the defining properties of a Collective, X can have property P if X reconstrued as Substance can have P. Setting aside whether lojbanmass is a useful notion and whether it is a Good Thing for it to play such a central role (as the meanings of loi/lei, mei, etc.), is this at least a workable definition? If it is, then people can reflect on whether they are happy with that, and with the corollary that unambiguous ways to express Collective and Substance would require new and more longwinded cmavo. --And.