krtisfranks wrote:
> I think that there really are two words here.
>
> The first is "cardinality", which we already have. It is simple "x1 is
the
> number of elements in/cardinality of set x2". This uses on kancu2 and
> kancu3 (antirespectively). This requires no counter (person doing the
> counting) and is independent of the method used to count.
>
> The second word is something along the lines of "enumerate", "tabulate",
> "tally", or "count up". This is a task performed by someone (a counter)
and
> depends on the method. I personally think that it would be fine to
> straight-up delete kancu3 for this purpose, but perhaps we should just
> retool it (I am not sure how, though). Instead of trying to figure out
the
> cardinality of a set (kancu2), it would just be producing a running tally

> of objects/divisions/units (kancu2'). In this way, it is not actually
tied
> to the grand total, only what has thus far been counted. This word would
be
> useful for estimation of the size of an army, counting coins or money
> values from a purse (counting by units), or counting down in units of
time
> (kancu2' would just be something like "loi snidu"). In this word a new
> terbri could be introduced which designates the first value from which
the
> counting starts; in counting down time, this would commonly be something
> like "ten [seconds]". (Aside: counting down would involve li ni'u (pa) in

> the units terbri.) Notice that the counter is not actually counting how
> many seconds are remaining; they are starting with that knowledge and
then
> enumerating them in reverse order as they pass (within approximation -
the
> counted seconds are not perfect, nor is the original t-minus-ten mark).


Previous discussion:
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban-beginners/sWzqifBPUTU/discussion