BPFK Section: Subjective Numbers
pc:
> Re: BPFK Section: Subjective Numbers
> The titel is a bit misleading as it applies at most to the last three cases;
> the oters are perfectly objective.
Yes. CLL calls some of them "indefinite numbers" and others "inexact numbers".
I can't change the title though.
> As often noted, the last three need a place (s0mehow) to talk about purposes
> (at which point they become less subjective).
Yes, that might be a new cmavo in NOI. (Or, I wouldn't mind recycling
{voi} for this.)
> Once that desideratum is
> found, we also need a quantifier(?) "so many" for results rather than
> purposes and [prbably a comparative form, "as many as" (but at least the last
> of these can be cobbled together fairly naturally out of existing elements).
I wonder if {xokau} plus the new NOI might work for "so many... that".
Hmmm... This needs more thinking.
> While "too few" is probably the same (as near as makes no never-mind) to
> "less than enough," "too many" is not the same as "more than enough." "Too
> many" has negative connotations (at least, there may also be objective bits)
> while "more than enough" is positive — where "enough" is just barely
> sqeaking by.
I prefer "the right number" as a gloss for {rau}. Then "too few" is
"less than the right number" and "too many" is "more than the right
number". This means that I'm defining {rau} as bounded both from below
and from above: {rau} is more than too few AND less than too many.
"Enough" is more properly {su'orau}, "at least the right number".
The reason is that this seems to be how the so'V series works too,
as well as numbers in general {ci gerku} is exactly three dogs, not
at least three dogs. Also, there is an example in CLL, {raumoi} in line,
that doesn't really work with "at least the right number", because
the right number is clearly bounded from above in that case.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
___
Do you Yahoo!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now.
http://messenger.yahoo.com