The Quandary about xorlo
indeed, I believe names are mass
> nouns).
> The point was that when you consider the normal
> behaviour of English mass nouns, the behaviour
> of Mr Broda seems less odd.
>
> --And.
Gee, I was taught at one time or another that
names were logical constants or descriptions or
quantifiers. I suppose mass nouns will do as
well, the bits being spatio-temporal slabs, I
suppose. Let's see how names and Dr. Dr. compare
to paradigm mass nouns. Well, names are like
mass nouns in thet the mass is prior to the
slices metaphysically; Dr. Dr. however is
derivative from the individual doctors (which I
suppose are the bits here). Dr. Dr. and names
agree in restricting the shapes of bits:
presumably a blendreized joint practice is not a
bit of Dr. Dr. ; bits have to be humanoid in a
broad geometrical way. Names are strange in that
the bits have all to be part of the same
spatio-temporal continuity (or maybe causal to
get Buddhist in); some bit not connected to
others in such a continuity is not a bit of the
named (well, there is resurrection but problems
about mass nouns is the least of its troubles).
Dr. Dr. bits can be disconnected cmpletely (and,
indeed, typically are) as are paradigm masses.
All of this is, of course, of little relevance to
Lojban, which lacks any native mass expressions.
You can build them up but they always look
phoney, since the masses are so clearly
etymologically built up of the "bits" — Dr.
Dr.'s problem again. Analogies from paradigm
masses to either names or Dr. Dr. are going to be
pretty weak and in need of some pressing
consideration to work. For Lojban they will be
useless, since no pressing consideration can
arise in that ontology.