[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 12:54:19PM -0000, And Rosta wrote:
> 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
Huh.
> 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:
Inner on lei is su'o. I still don't know what this "substance" and
"collective" crap is. I haven't seen a definition even half as
clear as the definition of lojbanmasses in the book, which I suggest
you re-read.
> 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?
No.
> 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.
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@hidden.email
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
binLbMb6fFj1k.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped