Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi  with smtp
	(Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0qTzVk-000023C; Sat, 30 Jul 94 00:30 EET DST
Message-Id: <m0qTzVk-000023C@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 1431; Sat, 30 Jul 94 00:29:23 EET
Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 1428; Sat, 30 Jul 1994 00:29:22 +0200
Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE
 (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3016; Fri, 29 Jul 1994 23:28:29 +0200
Date:         Fri, 29 Jul 1994 17:31:34 EDT
Reply-To:     jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
From:         Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Message from Colin FIne
X-To:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 952
Lines: 30

la kolin cusku di'e

[...]
> so      lu'i le nanmu cu se cimei
>
> does mean "the set of (all) the designated men is a set of cardinal 3"
>
> I thought at first that "le'i nanmu" meant the same thing, but now I think
> it means "the designated sets of men" - I'm not sure, though.

Would {lu'i ro lo nanmu} be the same as {lo'i nanmu}? Probably yes.

> In the same way,
>         "lu'a le klesi" means "[all] the members of the designated classes",
> distributively, and

[all] or [at least one of]? The cmavo list suggests [all], the grammar paper
suggests [at least one of]. I agree with the paper, but in any case it would
be nice if they were made to agree.


>         "lu'o le nanmu" means "the mass of [all] the designated men"
> (which has properties of some of the men, properties of all of the men,
> and properties of the mass)

Again, what's the default quantifier of {lu'o}?
{pisu'o} would seem to be consistent with {lei}, {loi}.


Jorge