Return-Path: Received: from kantti.helsinki.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rvYZa-0009acC; Mon, 3 Apr 95 01:56 EET DST Received: from fiport.funet.fi (fiport.funet.fi [128.214.109.150]) by kantti.helsinki.fi (8.6.11p1+Emil1.1/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA17025 for ; Mon, 3 Apr 1995 01:56:44 +0300 Received: from LISTSERV.FUNET.FI (LISTSERV@FIPORT) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-13 #2494) id <01HOVPCEK1AO003KG1@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Sun, 02 Apr 1995 22:56:28 +0200 (EET) Date: Sun, 02 Apr 1995 18:58:34 -0400 (EDT) From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Subject: More about scopes Sender: Lojban list To: Veijo Vilva Reply-to: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Message-id: <01HOVPCF75W6003KG1@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> X-Envelope-to: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1027 Lines: 36 Continuing with the joys of quantifier scopes... (1) le ci nanmu cu bevri pa tanxe Each of the three men carries one box. No problem there. Each one has his own box. (2) lei ci nanmu cu bevri pa tanxe The three men (as one entity) carry one box. Again no problem. They are all carrying it together. (3) le ci nanmu cu bevri le pa tanxe Each of the three men carries the one box. Again no problem. (1) describes three separate events, possibly with three different boxes. (3) also describes three events, this time with the same box. They may take turns to carry it. My problem comes with this one: (4) le ci nanmu cu bevri pa tanxe goi ko'a Each of the three men carries it, one box. This is very different from (1), because now they are all carrying the same box. Otherwise, when we next refer to ko'a we wouldn't know which box it was! My conclusion is that {goi} forces the scope of {pa} in this case to be wider than that of {ro le ci nanmu}. Am I right? Jorge