Re: No static, democratic (was: essentials of a gadri system)

xod:
> On Mon, 4 Aug 2003, And Rosta wrote:
> 
> > John:
> > > And Rosta scripsit:
> > >
> > > > 4. Named Collective. The Collective is identified by name
> > > > (cmene). Plus optional noi- and voi-statements (of cardinality
> > > > and/or Superset).
> > >
> > > Is this like "The Smiths", the rock group whose members are not named
> > > "Smith", or is this like "the Smiths", a family all of whom are named
> > > "Smith"? I.e. I don't know what "identified by name" means.
> >
> > It is like the rock group. The plural morpheme in the example is a
> > distractor. "Fleetwood Mac" would also be an example of (4), as would
> > "John Cowan".
> >
> > The proposals treat individuals as singleton collectives. Things don't
> > have to be done thus, but doing them that way leads to a more minimal
> > inventory of primitives.
> 
> The attribute that distinguishes collectives from pluralities is that a
> collective has at least one interesting emergent property, which the
> speaker is considering. The null property of belonging to a plurality is
> unhelpful and should not be considered. (Flames piped to /dev/grice.) I
> mean instead something like the ability to carry a piano.

What you call a 'plurality' -- which is a misleading term, since I am
talking about groups of ONE OR MORE individuals -- becomes what you call
a 'collective' as soon as you predicate something of it. E.g. as soon
as you say the plurality carries the piano, lo & behold it has acquired
the emergent property (piano carrying) that renders it a 'collective'.

However, if you prefer, replace my use of 'Collective' by 'Group' or
'N-some', or whatever term you prefer. 

--And.