[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

TECH: Mark Shoulson waiting for a taxi

>Date:         Fri, 3 Sep 1993 14:06:01 +0100
>From: Mr Andrew Rosta <ucleaar%UCL.AC.UK@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>
>X-To:         lojban@cuvma.BITNET

>If I remember right (probably not), a (long) while back Mark
>wrote about waiting for a taxi - any taxi - to come along. Since
>the taxi is non-specific, this rules out use of the le-series
>- le karcrtaksi, lei karcrtaksi.
>But "lo karcrtaksi" doesn't seem quite right, if it means
>"there is some taxi such that M.S. was waiting for it" -
>it suggests that a taxi for which Mark was not waiting could
>have come along. And of course he wasn't waiting for every
>taxi, either (or maybe he was?). My hazy recollection is that
>Mark used "loi karcrtaksi" (the "loi" not the fukpi zei valsi)
>- he was waiting for some manifestation of the mass of all X
>such that X is a taxi.

>If this works, it is useful for things like
>  I want/seek a book (to prop open the door)
>mi sisku loi cukta
>  I want/seek a book (a particular one I'm halfway through reading)
>mi sisku le cukta

>Is this right? I know it was discussed earlier in the year by Iain
>et al., but that discussion seems to have left scarcely any
>trace in my memory.

As I recall, the point about {loi} for that purpose was made in a quote
from JCB that John Cowan posted here (with allowances for Loglan words
corresponding to {loi}).  I agreed with it though, and it makes a certain
amount of sense, if we can get away from thinking of masses as necessarily
plural things.  Shouldn't {loi} be able to mean "some instantiation of an
indefinite (massified) class"?  Or do I misremember?