WikiDiscuss

pc:
> Then, if "sumti" refers to a set or group, {me
> "sumti"} is just {du "sumti"}, a much clearer
> claim, to say the least.

Yes, whenever sumti has a single referent, {me}
reduces to {du}, (There are some syntactical differences,
but basically that's it.)

> And this is then
> completely general, since every sumti
> refers to an individual,

No. Some sumti refer to more than one individual.
For example {le ci plise} refers to three individuals.
In this case {me le ci plise} means "x1 is/are among
the three apples", whereas {du le ci plise} gives
"x1 are the three apples".

> > I'm not sure which definitions you consider
> > that become circular.
>
> All the ones that run {lo me "sumti"} especially
> when defining "sumti" or one of its extensions.

lo [PA] broda = zo'e noi ke'a broda [gi'e klani li PA lo se gradu be lo
broda]
loi [PA] broda = lo gunma be lo [PA] broda
lo'i [PA] broda = lo selcmi be lo [PA] broda enai lo na broda
PA sumti = PA da poi ke'a me sumti
piPA sumti = lo piPA si'e be lo pa me sumti

I don't see any circularity.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail