[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
xod: > Do you guys sign on to the larger scheme of > http://www.lojban.org/wiki/index.php/Towards%20a%20complete%20gadri%20pictur e > , with the exception perhaps of the definitions of Any and Nonspecific, > which I must ponder some more. With the exception of xod-Collective, XS covers everything we need to say, using only lo/le/la, lu'a and a couple of new LAhE. So I'm fairly flexible about what becomes of the rest of the gadri. For any proposal for the other gadri, I'd like to see a fully articulated proposal that covers outer and inner PA as well as the gadri itself. Before deciding on my own preferences for the other gadri, I'd like to discover where the conservatives stand on all this. Will they go along with XS, so long as the overall solution is as conservative as possible? Will they veto XS? Will they give up on the BF altogether? We need to know this, because it will affect the balance between utility and conservativeness in the solution we end up going for. Regarding the specifics of your solution, I currently abstain on lo'e and loi/lei. As for xod-Collective, I don't know how useful it is, but it is certainly hard to express by other means, so I support there being some dedicated way of expressing it. However, it is orthogonal to the Plurality/ Substance distinction, because Substance can have properties (such as weighing 2 kilos) that don't inherit to the constituent bits. Thus, "the people filled the room" and "the rubble filled the room" both seem to me to qualify as xod-Collectives. I am thinking that lo'i/le'i/la'i might be suitable for this purpose, generalizing the notion of 'mathematical set' to something like 'collection whose properties aren't shared with its constituents' (cardinality being the paradigm case of such a property). Inner tu'o/za'u would then distinguish Substance from Plurality. Outer PA would work as per XS. This would leave loi/lei/lai looking for a job. --And.