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 m0r87Jy-000071C; Thu, 17 Nov 94 15:56 EET
Message-Id: <m0r87Jy-000071C@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 4173; Thu, 17 Nov 94 15:56:29 EET
Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 4168; Thu, 17 Nov 1994 15:56:23 +0200
Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE
 (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6302; Thu, 17 Nov 1994 14:50:49 +0100
Date:         Thu, 17 Nov 1994 02:34:36 -0500
Reply-To:     Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
From:         Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: "re lo'e broda" is semantically bogus
X-To:         jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
X-cc:         lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 566
Lines: 13

JL>I think allowing {lo'e} and {le'e} to have quantifiers gives them
JL>a lot of usefulness. I really don't see much use for them as singular
JL>abstractions.

I will agree with Jorge on this, and will cite the archetype example of
"lo'e" for me:  "The typical American family has a mother, a father and
1.9 children."  That one always struck me as odd because I keep tryoing to
envision ".9" children.  But I can picture .9 of an abstraction that is
not really a human being.
lo'e merko lanzu selci cu girzu fi lo'e mamta ce lo'e patfu ce papiso lo'e
verba

lojbab