From jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU  Sat Mar  6 22:45:19 2010
Date:         Tue, 23 May 1995 13:49:49 EDT
From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Subject:      Re: Quantifiers
To: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@access.digex.net>
X-From-Space-Date: Tue May 23 18:46:44 1995
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
Message-ID: <UnMLXR1KC7H.A.N7E._t0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

la dilyn cusku di'e

> OK, I see what you're trying to do here, although one bothers me slightly:
>
>  >         lei ninmu cu frica lei nanmu le ka xokau ke'a cu nenri le kumfa.
>  >         The women differ from the men in how many of them are in the room.
>  >         (how many = xokau; them = ke'a)
>
> By the rules for {ke'a} as I understand them, here it's a placeholder
> for either {lei ninmu} or {lei nanmu}--in any case, a mass.  I would
> translate the sentence (under your rules) by
>
>       The women differ from the men in what portion of them are in
>               the room.
>

Good point, you're right. For my meaning use {xokau lu'a ke'a}.

> (The same thing happens in your original sentence:
>          le se klani be lei nanmu bei lo ckilu be le ka xokau ke'a
>          cu nenri le kumfa cu du li ci

Well, here it is not so clear, since ke'a doesn't really tie in with
{lei nanmu}. It's just "a scale to measure the property of how many
---- are in the room". {xokau} can mean both how many, or what
fraction, so it is a bit ambiguous.

> Don't know exactly how to fix it.  Maybe stick in a {lu'a} before
> {ke'a}?

Yes, exactly!

> And maybe switch to using sets if you lose the fight with
> John.)

Never!  :)

>  > I think this is all consistent, and I don't see how {ni} could fit in
>  > there.
>
> Hmm.  I'm still somewhat uncomfortable.  The {kau} in the examples
> above served as a placeholder for the point of comparison (i.e., in
> which way they differed).  I can't imagine what a sumti like {mi klani
> le ka ke'a dunda makau} would mean

If you mena {mi ckaji le ka ke'a dunda makau}, that would be "I am
characterized by what I give/ what I give is characteristic of mi".
With {klani}, I have no idea.

> (unlike {mi klani le ka ke'a dunda
> da} <==> {mi dunda da}).  Worse, what does {ko'a} refer to in the
> following?
>
>       ko'a ka ke'a dunda makau

The property of _what_ is given (I don't mean a property of the gift).

        ko'e se steci le ka ke'a dunda makau
        He is special in what he gives.

        ko'a ka ke'a dunda makau  i ko'e se steci ko'a


Jorge