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 m0qpNnQ-000024C; Mon, 26 Sep 94 23:41 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 9230; Mon, 26 Sep 94 23:41:27 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 9228; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 23:41:24 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3619; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 22:38:26 +0100 Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 19:41:34 +0100 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Re: any X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: (Your message of Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:06:38 O.) Content-Length: 592 Lines: 15 Veijo: > It is the same with all selbri - how ever concrete. We don't > need to have {nitcu} or {djica}. If you kill (with no selection > based on some criteria) 10 animals out of the 50, you kill > any/every animal up to the count of 10. I don't think this & your other similar examples are right, for realis contexts. If you have killed 10 out of 50 animals, I cannot just pick any ten of them & truthfully assert that you killed them (unless by a freak of chance I happen to pick the right 10). Your context would work for, say, *intending* to kill 10 out of 50 animals. --- And