Re: lohe, lehe & ka

[ucleaar <ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk>]

Jorge:
> > Say there's a pile of papers on my left and a pile of papers on my
> > right. I can't differentiate between each individual sheet of paper,
> > but I can differentiate between the two piles. This is what I
> > meant by distinguishing between masses. For you, we would have
> > "re pisuho loi papri".
>
> No, I never said that. "repisu'o" is a single number, two point something.
> You can't easily quantify over fractions of the total mass.

Am I commiting some logical fallacy in assuming we can quantify over
fractions? I don't see why. Or do you mean it's difficult to do it
in Lojban?

> > Hmm. How would I distinguish between "every mass of my paper is on my
> > left and on my right"
>
> There is only one mass of your paper in loi terms. You may wish to
> designate different masses as "my paper", but then you have to use lei.
> {piro loi mi papri} is a single thing, there is only one of it, but you
> may talk about its fractions.

I want to say that some fraction of loi papri is on my left, and some
fraction is on my right, and together these fractions add up to piro.
[This is back to September's Brahms symphonies exchange, which never
got resolved. It's like "I met admirers of every B.S.", where for
every B.S. I met someone who admired it. In the loi papri case, we
want "piroi lo mi papri is such that on my left there is part of it
and on my right there is part of it, and nowhere else is there part
of it".]

I wouldn't want to say this on the Mr My Paper interpretation. In that
case, Mr My Paper would be simply on both sides of me at the same time.

---
And