RE: [lojban] Re: tu'o du'u (was Re: xoi'a)

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

Jordan:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2002 at 05:01:37PM +0100, And Rosta wrote:
> [...]
> > It's kind of like if I say "a (certain) nose of mine is big" or 
> "look at a (certain) 
> > sun" -- since I have only one nose, and there is only one sun, the 
> > referent is obvious, yet the locutions imply that I have more than one nose
> > and that there is more than one sun.
> 
> Also I think saying "lo nazbi be mi" is more or less wrong. If
> you're talking about your nose, you must know it, so you really
> should say "le nazbi be mi". 

It's not as straighforward as that. {lo nazbi be mi cu clani} claims 
that I have a nose and it is long. That doesn't imply that I
don't know my nose; it doesn't *refer* to my nose, so it's not
so much 'talking about my nose' as saying I have a nose.

> Same thing as the du'u stuff. The
> "a nose of mine" reading is much more like "lo nazbi" than "le
> nazbi". 

"A certain nose of mine" is {le nazbi be mi}, on the reasonable
supposition that in English "a certain" expresses specificity.

> The inner ro on "le" does *not* imply I have multiple
> noses. 

No, indeed it doesn't. What implies you have multiple noses is the 
use of {le}, which is in paradigmatic contrast with {lo} 
(+distributive, +specific, versus +distributive -specific), instead 
of {lo'e}. See my other reply to you.

> But using "lo" insead of "le" would imply I'm not sure
> which thing is my nose.

Not really. "lo pendo be mi cu clani" = "I have a tall friend"
-- doesn't imply I don't know who my friends are. Conversely,
"le pendo be do cu clani", "a certain friend of yours is tall",
is not inappropriate when I don't know which person is your tall
friend; it just means that I am referring to a particular friend
of yours, e.g. one you mentioned to me last week.

--And.