From sentto-44114-18844-1046877385-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com Wed Mar 05 08:16:29 2003
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Wed, 05 Mar 2003 08:16:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from n36.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.104])
	by digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.12)
	id 18qbYw-00011S-01
	for lojban-in@lojban.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2003 08:16:10 -0800
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-44114-18844-1046877385-lojban-in=lojban.org@returns.groups.yahoo.com
Received: from [66.218.66.95] by n36.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 05 Mar 2003 15:16:25 -0000
X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_6_1); 5 Mar 2003 15:16:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 89809 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2003 15:16:24 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
  by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 5 Mar 2003 15:16:24 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.49)
  by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 5 Mar 2003 15:16:24 -0000
Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
	 Wed, 5 Mar 2003 07:16:24 -0800
Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
	Wed, 05 Mar 2003 15:16:24 GMT
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Bcc: 
Message-ID: <F49aJbqJGNzscE8Npqh0000020f@hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Mar 2003 15:16:24.0578 (UTC) FILETIME=[2F8E4620:01C2E32A]
From: "Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>
X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2]
X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list lojban@yahoogroups.com; contact lojban-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list lojban@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 15:16:24 +0000
Subject: [lojban] Re: Any
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-archive-position: 4355
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list


la greg cusku di'e

>I have two possible solutions to the problem of saying:
>
>"I need a doctor" (ie any doctor will do)
>
>(1){mi nitcu lu'a lo'i mikce}

The way I understand {lu'a}, {lu'a lo'i mikce} is equivalent
to {lo mikce}. Both are "at least one member of the set of
all doctors". But I won't claim that {lu'a} has such a well
established definition as {lo}. There are different
understandings of how LAhEs work and they've never been fully
clarified.

>or
>
>(2){lo se nitcu be mi cu mikce}
[...]
>(2) arises from another concern. I'm wondering whether it would work
>differently if da is scoped as being a {se nitcu}. It only works if the
>following are not equivalent:
>
>mi nitcu da poi mikce
>da poi se nitcu be mi cu mikce
>da se nitcu be mi gi'e mikce

Those are all equivalent. In logical terms, they all
reduce to Ex:N(mi,x)&M(x)
where N(,) is nitcu and M() is mikce.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
DVD Rentals with No Late Fees - Try Netflix for FREE!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/abvVKB/pEZFAA/46VHAA/GSaulB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/