Re: Classification and 'to be'

In my project I'm calling provitional Fluxian, Nouns basic form is supposed
to represent a class.  Then:

waw@do is the class of dogs.
wawedu = a dog
wawedo = the dog
wawedy = any dog

jur@do is the class of animals
juredu = an animal
juredo = the animal

An there is a verbal form derived from them, thus:

jur@da = being an animal (belogn to the animal class).

Then (with no mood, tense, aspect or other disctintion)
wawedu jur@da = a dog is an animal (there is a dog who is an animal)
wawedy jur@da = any dog is an animal (dogs ara animals)
or
wawudy jur@da = (all) dogs are animals.

conversely one could say

juredu waw@da = an animal (there is an animal which) is a dog (belong to the
dog class).

adjectives can be consider clases, then

pret@sa: being black
pret@so: the set (class) of black things

wawedo pret@sa: the dog is black

The other meanings of to be: being at a place, being equal to or exists use
different verbal constructions.

I have to look into mi sketchs in order to present all more consistenly.

_____
  Carlos Eugenio Thompson Pinzsn
  http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/9028/