From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET  Wed Sep  8 07:44:20 1993
Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 8 Sep 1993 07:44:20 -0400
Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 8 Sep 1993 07:44:17 -0400
Message-Id: <199309081144.AA01990@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)    with BSMTP id 6094; Wed, 08 Sep 93 07:42:41 EDT
Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with  BSMTP id 9687; Wed, 08 Sep 93 07:45:38 EDT
Date:         Wed, 8 Sep 1993 12:40:39 BST
Reply-To: I.Alexander.bra0125@oasis.icl.co.uk
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: Iain Alexander <I.Alexander.bra0125@OASIS.ICL.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: TECH: LE & LO
X-To:         ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk
X-Cc:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: Erik Rauch <rauch>
Status: RO
X-Status: 

la and. cusku di'e
> (ii) I think all Germans are zabna. So if I choose to call
> Germans zabna, should I say

>    do ba speni lo zabna
> or
>    do ba speni le zabna

> Neither is satisfactory. The problem with the first is that it
> would be true if you married someone zabna but not German.
> The second suggests that I have in mind who it is you will
> marry, which is not the case.

> The solution, I think, is:

>     do ba speni lo me luha le((h)i) zabna

Ugh!  I don't think you need to go quite this far. %~>

At least part of the _specific_ nature of {le broda} is due to
the default {ro} quantifier ({[ro] le [su'o [pa]] broda}).
I think all you need to do to talk about (a) non-specific
individual(s) is to add an explicit quantifier.

    do ba speni su'o le zabna

The {su'o} could of course be other things such as {pa}, depending
on exactly what you wanted to say.  {le zabna} remains the (specific)
group that you have in mind as being described as {zabna}, but now
your selecting from that group.

co'o mi'e .i,n.