From jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU  Sat Mar  6 22:44:57 2010
Date:         Thu, 25 May 1995 20:58:20 EDT
From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Subject:      Re: Quantifiers
To: Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
X-From-Space-Date: 
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu
Message-ID: <BD6VQkDX9tO.A.4mE.pt0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org>

la i,n cusku di'e
> >         mi facki le du'u le cukta cu cpana le jubme
> >         I discover that the book is on the table.
> >
> >         mi facki le du'u makau cpana le jubme
> >         I discover what's on the table.
>
> .u'i'i'i'i You appear to have interpreted Dylan's "first place
> of {facki}" as "second place of {facki}", whereas I think
> he meant "first place of {fatci}".

Now I see why he said first place.

>         *le du'u makau cpana le jubme cu fatci*
>
> is grammatical, but not meaningful in the sense we usually think
> of {fatci}.  I can however think of circumstances where we would
> say something similar in English, meaning that the contents of
> the table-top are a matter of fact, not open to dispute.  I'm not
> sure if this would be malglico, or if there's a better way of
> expressing this in Lojban.

That's how I would interpret it.  What is the usual sense of fatci?
Doesn't {le du'u le cukta cu cpana le jubme cu fatci} mean that that the
book is on the table is a matter of fact, not open to dispute?  In what
other sense could it be a fact?  The sentence with {le cukta} implies
the one with {makau}, which says the same but without mentioning what's
on the table, just as in the case of {facki}.

> I can't however think of interpretations
> for the corresponding bridi with {jetnu} or {jitfa}.

How about something like:

        i la djan pu cusku le sedu'u le cukta cu cpana le jubme
        ije le plise cu cnita le stizu
        i le du'u makau cpana le jubma cu jetnu iku'i le du'u
        makau cu cnita le stizu cu jitfa  i le tamca enai le plise
        cu cnita le stizu


co'o mi'e xorxes