[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
John:
> Jorge Llambias scripsit:
>
> > The Jbomass part I believe is almost fully compatible with
> > SL, plus it incorporates some useful stuff that SL lacks
> >
> > SL {piPA loi ro broda} == 3rdExSol {piPA loi ro broda}
> > SL {loi ro broda} (collective) == 3rdExSol {loi ro broda}
> > SL {loi broda} (substance) == 3rdExSol {loi tu'o broda}
> > SL {PA broda} == 3rdExSol {PA broda}
> >
> > Those are fully compatible. The only difference would be
> > that 3rdExSol adds some forms that are not used in SL,
> > namely: {loi PA broda} when PA is not {ro}, which in
> > SL would be interpreted as a cardinality of the whole set
> > and in 3rdExSol it is the cardinality of a collective which
> > need not be the whole set. (This permits us to make sense
> > of {PA loi PA broda} as quantification over collectives.)
> >
> > So the Jbomass-part of 3rd ExSol is practically
> > identical to SL
>
> I accept this part of 3XS completely. So call me half a convert. :-)
>
> But for my part, lo xirma is going to be an animal that drops dung, and
> not merely a kind of animal that drops a kind of dung
In 3/4XS, it is true that lo xirma drops dung regardless of whether
it is true that da xirma.
If you still want to insist that it is false that lo xirma drops
dung if no da xirma, then the situation is that 3/4XS covers
everything you want to be able to say, but at the price of
exploiting the redundant lo/loi contrast in SL in order to be
able to also speak of Kinds.
--And.