[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
And Rosta scripsit: > (ii) Let (tu'o)lVi mean "Mr Xod-collective of", where a xod-collective is a > kind of group that shares none of its properties with its constituents; So a small group of large objects and a large group of small objects are xod-collectives, but not a s.g. of s.o. or a l.g. of l.o.? Of what utility is such a notion? Or do you mean that it *essentially* (i.e. non-accidentally) shares none of its properties? If so, how is it distinct from a mathematical set? -- John Cowan <jcowan@hidden.email> http://www.reutershealth.com "But no living man am I! You look upon a woman. Eowyn I am, Eomund's daughter. You stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone, if you be not deathless. For living or dark undead, I will smite you if you touch him."