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 m0r4fzK-00005bC; Tue, 8 Nov 94 04:08 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 7805; Tue, 08 Nov 94 04:08:56 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 7801; Tue, 8 Nov 1994 04:08:55 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5603; Tue, 8 Nov 1994 03:05:46 +0100 Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 18:07:34 -0800 Reply-To: Gerald Koenig Sender: Lojban list From: Gerald Koenig Subject: lo X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1032 Lines: 31 I (djer) said: > The default lo would be specific or singular and the > optional explicit greater-than-one kind would be non-specific or > general. Examples of this usage: deletions > .i mi pencu lo ci tanxe general, transparant > I touch three real boxes. xorge responded> Notice that in your translations you have implicitly an outside quantifier {ro}, not {pa}. For example, you say that {mi pencu lo ci tanxe} means {mi pencu ro lo ci tanxe} = "I touch each of the three boxes", and not what you proposed as a default quantifier {mi pencu pa lo ci tanxe} = "I touch one of the three boxes". What it means in standard Lojban is {mi pencu su'o lo ci tanxe} = "I touch at least one of the only three things that are real boxes". djer then says> I didn't propose an outer quantifier. I was just exploring the consequences of letting lo mean lo pa as a default. That's what I meant by saying the default lo would be singular. > These sentences parse. It is a matter of convention what lo tanxe is to > mean. djer