From cbogart@QUETZAL.COM  Sat Mar  6 22:44:57 2010
Date:         Fri, 26 May 1995 14:19:24 -0600
From: Chris Bogart <cbogart@QUETZAL.COM>
Subject:      Re: quantifiers on sumti - late response
To: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
X-From-Space-Date: 
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
Message-ID: <1JSO0eJJ-IO.A.-mE.pt0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

>Probably it can be understood that way in those cases, but it could cause
>confusion. For example {re le gunma} means "two of the masses", which is
>different from {re lu'a le gunma}, "two components of the mass". In the
>case of {lei}, {loi}, {do}, etc there is a single mass, and so a quantifier
>greater than one doesn't make sense and can probably be understood to mean
>the components, but when the sumti refers to more than one mass, there
>could be trouble.

.i jimpe .i drata se stidi fa la'edi'e:
.i lu<< re gunma be lo gunka cu zbasu le ti dinju >>li'u (to zoi gy.[two
groups of workers built this building]gy. toi) cu simsa .e'u lu<< re loi
gunka cu zbasu le ti dinju >>li'u

.i ku'i da nabmi .i pe'i na cumki fi'o valsi zo lei .uinai