Re: masses - response to Jorge

[jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU]

la lojbab cusku di'e
> Example:  You are approaching a corner, and you see as you approach,
> sticking from behind the corner, a man's ear and a woman's nose, but no
> other identifiable part of their bodies.  You also can hear from their
> conversation that there is a child present.  In this case, then, you can
> say that "mi viska re lu'a le nanmu ku joi le ninmu ku joi le verba" and
> mean precisely that you see the man's ear and the woman's nose, since in
> fact that is what you actually DO see.  From the components (I like
> "portions" better in some contexts, like this one), you infer properties
> of the whole.  To you the observer, the ear IS the man and the nose IS
> the woman.

I agree with that, you are seeing two of them, the man and the woman.
If you only see the man's ear and the man's leg, but nothing of the
woman or the child, then you are seeing one of them, not two of them.
You'd say {mi viska pa lu'a le nanmu ku joi le ninmu ku joi le verba},
so your example agrees with what I'm saying.

Jorge