Re: Re: essentials of a gadri system

--- John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote:
> And Rosta scripsit:
> 
> > For any property there is a Kind, that is all. In an ideal world, it
> > would be as easy to talk about the Kind that embodies that property
> > as about "da" that has the property and "it" that has the property.
> 
> On this view, I think the Kind is simply the x1 of ka, so it is actually
> easier to talk about the Kind ("da poi ka broda") than to talk about
> something that has the property ("da ckaji de poi ka broda").

(Something that has the property is just {da poi broda}.)

> Slogan version: Kinds are properties are reified predicates.

This would be a big deviation from usage of {ka}. We would be able
to say:

lo ka prenu cu so'iroi klama lo ka zarci kei fu lo ka karce 
People often go to the market by car.

That's nothing like the usual ka=du'u version of ka, where properties
don't go to properties driving other properties.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com