[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: plural
la .and. cusku di'e
> This may seem obvious for a selbri like prenu, but think about "eye", for
> example: "le pa [eye]" meaning "one pair of eyes" is fairly natural, &
> not necessarily misleading (to be sure whether it is, go and ask a
> native speaker of Lojban...).
>
> In fact the problem of what is the unit of broda that we use for purposes
> of counting is one I haven't seen addressed. The English gloss of 'kanla'
> as 'eye' makes me assume "pa lo kanla" is one eye, but is that necessarily
> correct? Could pa lo kanla be a pair of eyes, the eyeage of one person,
> with a single eye being "pimu loi pa lo kanla"? The general point I'm
> making is that how you delimit one individual broda from another is as
> much part of the definition of broda as anything else is; it can't be
> taken for granted as self-evident, or inherent in the extramental
> world.
You are correct in principle, but it seems clear from existing usage that
the body parts are, in fact, counted in the same way as English: two legs
per {remna}, and a fortiori two eyes, so "pa lo kanla [be zo'e]" is one
of somebody's eyes.
--
John Cowan sharing account <lojbab@access.digex.net> for now
e'osai ko sarji la lojban.