[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Here's Jim Carter's view of Loglanmasses:
Loglan has a concept of a "mass individual". According to Brown
[L1] it is more characteristic of non-Western cultures. Here is my
best explanation of it. Take the full referent set of an argument,
and personify it so that, potentially at least, it is the same
kind of thing as its members. For example, all sharks can be
considered to be instances or manifestations of an archetypical
shark god. This composite object is the mass individual. In
Loglan, arguments in the "serving or portion" category, like
"cutri-water", generally are used as mass individuals.
I thought it might be interesting to see the Gua\spi list of
gadri as well. They come in pairs depending on whether individuals
or sets are intended (these being the two classes of things in Gua\spi's
rarefied ontology). Phonological note: Gua\spi "x" = Lojban "j";
Gua\spi "w" = English "ng" (velar nasal).
xe: in-mind individual(s)
xy: the set of in-mind individual(s)
xa: each individual
xu: the set of every individual
xi: each individual, except (an/a few) atypical one(s)
xr: the set containing every individual, except (an/a few) atypical one(s)
xo: one or more individuals, it matters not which
xw: the set containing one or more individuals, it matters not which
xn: no individuals
--
John Cowan jcowan@hidden.email www.reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan
Assent may be registered by a signature, a handshake, or a click of a computer
mouse transmitted across the invisible ether of the Internet. Formality
is not a requisite; any sign, symbol or action, or even willful inaction,
as long as it is unequivocally referable to the promise, may create a contract.
--_Specht v. Netscape_