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 m0qsO7Z-00005XC; Wed, 5 Oct 94 06:38 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 6015; Wed, 05 Oct 94 06:38:41 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 6013; Wed, 5 Oct 1994 06:38:41 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6305; Wed, 5 Oct 1994 05:35:47 +0100 Date: Tue, 4 Oct 1994 22:21:04 -0600 Reply-To: Chris Bogart Sender: Lojban list From: Chris Bogart Subject: Re: admirers of 50% of symphonies X-To: lojban@cuvmb.bitnet To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 754 Lines: 18 >> (1) Each admirer admires some but not necessarily each of this 50% >> of symphonies > >lei neltce be su'o le re le zgikrsimfoni,a >The admirers of at least one of the two of the symphonies. What would it mean if you changed the first "le" to "lo"? Would that make the count (2) of symphonies veridicial but still allow for loose use of the word "symphony"? Does the "le" in your original sentence allow for, say "2000" to be meant by "re", if it's understood in context? >Didactic? I'm not didactic. No need to be defensive -- everyone here is polydactic. zo'o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Chris Bogart cbogart@quetzal.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~