From jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU  Sat Mar  6 22:44:58 2010
Date:         Wed, 24 May 1995 19:53:17 EDT
From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Subject:      Re: veridicality of lo - 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: <W4ig03oGBu.A.pnE.qt0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

Again in the search of boxes, lojbab says:
> If I say "mi nitcu lo tanxe" I am implying that any box will suffice,
> from a ring-box to a refrigerator-box.

Not as I understand it.  You are saying that there is at least one box
that you need, without giving us any clue as to which box is it.

> If I say "mi nitcu le tanxe" I
> am implying a specific in-mind box (which may not truthfully fit the
> predicate ke'a tanxe).

Right, you are saying that you need "the box", and presumably your
audience knows which referent fits that description.

> If I say "mi nitcu da voi tanxe" I am getting
> something half-way in between -

It means the same as {mi nitcu su'o le tanxe}, "I need at least one
of the boxes I have in mind".

> I don't think it is necessarily a
> specific box, but the restriction is certainly specific and in-mind and
> not necessarily veridical.

It is at least one out of an in-mind set, right.

> (Does this solve that bloody "any" problem?)

Nope.   :)

Jorge