[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la nitcion cusku di'e
> I spent three months advocating tu'o for Kind.
>
> The reason I gave up on it was, a, it was also coopted for Substance,
Not quite. Inner tu'o indicated Substance on the grounds that
Substance has no cardinality. Outer tu'o serves for anything
that is not quantified, i.e. any constant.
Inner PA indicates cardinality, outer PA is a quantifier.
Those are different functions.
Substance: no cardinality applies.
Constants: no quantifier applies.
> and b, generalising it from Mr Individual to Mr Anything Else was
> acutely painful. Remember Mr xodium?
Mr xodium in XS is {(tu'o) lo (tu'o) marjrxodiumu}
> Misterhood needs to be orthogonal to ontological type. While glorking
> tu'o will do for individuals, it will not do in the general case. How
> do the XSs come up with Mr xodium? (I do not have fond memories of
> Jorge's attempts to kludge around the subject.)
I don't remember my horrifying attempts. I apologise for the
distress they may have caused. It was unintentional... :)
> Is Mr xodium {tu'o loi marjrxodiumu}? Is Mr Couple {tu'o loi re lo
> prenu} -- or in your XS, {tu'o lo re prenu}? And is this really the way
> you want to go, rather than a general LAhE?
Or with glorking, {lo marjrxodiumu} and {lo re prenu}, yes!
An optional addition to XS (but not to be considered as a part of
the basic proposal) is to use loi/lei for {lo tu'o}/{le tu'o}, i.e. for
Substance, so xodium would be {loi marjrxodiumu} with no need to
glork the inner tu'o.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com