[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la nitcion cusku di'e
piro lo'i broda is not all possible bits (= subset) of a set. It is one
particular
subset of the set: the entirety of it. If lo'i broda = {a, b, c, d}, piro
lo'i broda = {a,
b, c, d}, since {a, b, c, d} is a subset of lo'i broda.
[...]
All sets consisting of at least one member of the set lo'i broda is: ro lu'i su'o lu'a piro lo'i broda
A couple of weeks ago I would have been in complete agreement about that. Right now, I don't know what to think. [...]
By the by, I deem that lu'a working on individuals gives you the individualsback; lu'a working on collectives and sets gives you any member of the collective/set (so the lu'i in the KS1 should be replaced by lu'a.)
The wording could be problematic. Collectives and sets are
individuals, so {lu'a} would be ambiguos for some individuals. Is
lu'a <set> the individual set, or a member of the set? You may
prefer to give a rule like: "lu'a ko'a is a member of ko'a if ko'a
has members, otherwise it is ko'a itself". The last bit is
justifiable because an individual can be thought of as a collective
of one member.
We also need to be clear about things like {lu'a ko'a e ko'e}.
Is that a member of the intersection? (I think yes.)
Similarly, lu'i of individuals gives the set of individuals; lu'i of a set
gives a set
of sets. So lu'i .abu .e by (lu'i re broda} = {a, b}; lu'i .abu ce by (lu'i
le'i re broda)
= { {a,b} }.
Excellent! That's the way I understand it.
lu'a loi djacu = any amount of the substance, physically distinct or not.
That works for me, because {djacu} is not really defined as a
substance. It is defined as an amount. {loi djacu} is a collective
of amounts of water, and {lu'a} selects a member from that
collective.
[...]
Fractionalquantifiers specify the size of the portion. They don't say anything about howmany such portions are possible (an inner quantifier), nor how many suchportions you're actually talking about (because, uh, you don't care, becauseit's a Unique.)
BTW, that's {lo pimu djacu} in XS4.
Should there be a difference in the way we do "Unique human",
"Unique couple of humans" and "Unique half a human". In XS4
they are {lo pa remna}, {lo re remna} and {lo pimu remna}.
And of course we have {lo pa djacu}, {lo re djacu} and
{lo pimu djacu} for 1, 2 and .5 quantities of water
(e.g. glasses of water in a given context).
I think you would have them now as: {tu'o remna},
{tu'o remna remei}, {tu'o remna pimusi'e}, {tu'o djacu},
{tu'o djacu remei}, {tu'o djacu pimusi'e}. If I understand
correctly, you want {pimu loi djacu} to be equivalent to
the last one. What, if anything, would you have {pa loi djacu}
and {re loi djacu} be?
mu'o mi'e xorxes
_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8 is here: Try it free* for 2 months
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup