Message-Id: <m0pXVJz-0000PZC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Fri, 18 Feb 1994 13:00:17 GMT
Reply-To:     i.alexander.bra0125@oasis.icl.co.uk
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
From:         i.alexander.bra0125@OASIS.ICL.CO.UK
Subject:      Re: TECH: Quantifiers (was: cukta)
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1279
Lines: 30

la xorxes. cusku di'e
> la i,n [tu'a?] mi spuda di'e

Since you ask :) - I prefer the {tu'a} here.  The x2 of spuda can be
an event, therefore it should always be one.  The most recent gismu
list I downloaded still has "person" as an option, but that may have
disappeared in a later revision.

> Let me try to put some flesh in the example. Say we are talking
> about the people who went to a party at John's place last Saturday.

> Can I use {ro lo klama} to mean all of them?

> The place they went to is clear from context, but I'm not talking
> about all the people who went there or will go there for ever and ever.
> (This would be a tense assumed from context, rather than a BAI, but
> it's the same thing.)

(This reminds me of the goat's legs discussion.)

I think the official answer will be no, it must mean all goers
irrespective of destination or time etc.  I'm not sure whether
there will be a water-tight explanation of this relative to
{ro lo klama be zo'e}.  I think it'll probably boil down to a question
of how much leeway you can expect even from a cooperative listener.
You could have used {le}, which is the usual way of indicating that
you're talking about something _in context_, and {lo} normally indicates
something relatively context-free.

mi'e .i,n.