From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Jun 13 07:45:40 2005
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 13 Jun 2005 07:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50)
	id 1DhqBe-0007qS-2Q
	for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 07:45:14 -0700
Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.195])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1DhqBZ-0007qK-F0
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 07:45:13 -0700
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 69so1025122wra
        for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 07:45:08 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=nWI+kFegRMYS7MlHSWMeGxyTFZDdNaMYyEX7hWT+7t35BkKNuyklSf1KWrAhPxalODGBtXzCXFN9GID1/Io+ByuX05lU7Z9WSXwibOmJvOeThAORh0+C7SBZ6KRoy1b1x/NUJIlsOyg1lCfTY4BUFwqDGidmAjaOrID/lx6J24A=
Received: by 10.54.36.66 with SMTP id j66mr2569237wrj;
        Mon, 13 Jun 2005 07:45:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.54.67.20 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 07:45:08 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <925d1756050613074515c6212d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:45:08 -0300
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban] Re: Un-definite quantifier.
In-Reply-To: <d8k46h+m1v1@eGroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <200506130847.39565.phma@phma.hn.org> <d8k46h+m1v1@eGroups.com>
X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--)
X-archive-position: 10148
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list

On 6/13/05, opi_lauma <opi_lauma@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > You don't need the {lo} here.
> Where? In the last example or in all my examples? 

PA lo gerku = PA gerku

so:

pa lo gerku = pa gerku
re lo gerku = re gerku
su'o lo gerku = su'o gerku
so'i lo gerku = so'i gerku
ro lo gerku = ro gerku

> And why I do not
> need {lo}? It is not necessary or I change meaning if I put {lo}?

Just not necessary.

> Is {su'o lo gerku} not equivalent to {lo gerku}? 

No, for example:

   lo gerku cu xagrai pendo lo remna
   Dog is best friend of man.

   su'o lo gerku cu xagrai pendo su'o lo remna
   At least one dog is best friend of at least one human.

Those are not equivalent.

>I thought that if we
> have no quantifier before {lo} it means (by default) "undefinet number
> but not zero", or the same "some", or the same "at leas one", isn't?

No quantifier means that number is not relevant to your claim. 
Using {su'o} says that number is relevant: at least one does what 
you claim, and it is important to point out that at least one
does it.

mu'o mi'e xorxes