Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Mon, 23 Aug 1993 08:25:54 -0400
Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Mon, 23 Aug 1993 08:25:49 -0400
Message-Id: <199308231225.AA02504@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 5186; Mon, 23 Aug 93 06:51:20 EDT
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with
 BSMTP id 1548; Mon, 23 Aug 93 06:53:59 EDT
Date:         Mon, 23 Aug 1993 11:41:37 +0100
Reply-To: Colin Fine <C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: Colin Fine <C.J.Fine@BRADFORD.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: TECH: QUERY: quantifier scope & cumki
To: Erik Rauch <rauch>
Status: O
X-Status: 
X-From-Space-Date: Mon Aug 23 12:41:37 1993
X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET

And asks:
++++++>
 How does one distinguish:
   For every x, it is possible that x is ....
   It is possible that every x is ....
>++++++++

I don't see a problem:

ro da zo'u cumki fa le nu da broda

cumki fa le nu ro da zo'u da broda


Until I noticed your subject I thought you were asking a different
question - not about the predicative 'it is possible' but about
the operators of modal logic - 'it is possible that' and
'it is necessary that'. Somehow the selbri 'cumki' and
'nibli' don't seem right for these.


        Colin