[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
I think the deal is for n \elem N* (0, 1, 2, 3...) for q \elem [0,1] lo broda = n lo broda (n people) loi broda = q lo broda (e.g. 1/2 the group of people; 1/2 the goo of a person) q lo broda =def q loi pa lo broda(1/2 of an individual is by definition half the substance of that individual: fractional quantification of individuals forces a substance interpretation. Not a collective interpretation: an individual of broda cannot consist of a collective of broda)
n loi broda =def n lo piro loi broda(2 lojbanmasses of individuals are by definition two lojbanmasses converted to individuals: integer quantification forces an individual interpretation)
Where loi broda is a collective, pa lo piro loi broda is an individual collective re lo piro loi broda is two individual collectives Where loi broda is a substance pa lo piro loi broda is the individual of all the substance re lo piro loi broda is meaningless Where broda is inherently-substance (e.g. djacu) pa lo djacu = pa lo pisu'o loi tu'o djacu Where broda is not inherently-substancepa lo tu'o remna = pa lo pisu'o loi tu'o remna = pa lo pisu'o loi su'opa lo remna (Take at least one individual human. Universal-grinder them. Take a scoop of that. That's your scoop of humanity.)
I'm petering out here, but the point is:the lo/loi distinction is wholly redundant to the piro/ro distinction, but signals it in the absence of overt quantification: it indicates the potential domain of quantification. The outer quantifiers when omitted have default values, which are either defeasible or not. I suspect they are defeasible. But in formally speaking of lojbanmasses, we must supply them; we leave omitting them until we get to speakability. Both collectives and substances are quantified by piro. So loi isn't freed up at all to do collective work, if loi indicates "this is fractionally quantified".
An explicit outer quantifier forces a conversion from lo to loi or loi to lo. The matrix (omitting forced conversions) is: OUTER GADRI INNER ro lo ro Individual piro loi ro Collective piroi loi tu'o Substance ro lo tu'o Substance individuated (Substance -> Individual)loi tu'o and lo tu'o both indicate substance. lo tu'o heads to countable amounts of substances (re lo pisu'o djacu; pa lo piro djacu), loi tu'o presumably to generic substances.
I'm sure there are holes in this you told me about 2 months ago that I didn't get. Remind me what they are.
-- **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** * Dr Nick Nicholas, French & Italian Studies nickn@hidden.email * University of Melbourne, Australia http://www.opoudjis.net * "Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity of locutional rendering, the * circumscriptional appelations are excised." --- W. Mann & S. Thompson, * _Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organisation_, 1987. * **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** ****