Return-Path: Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0tFpun-0000ZTC; Thu, 16 Nov 95 00:02 EET Message-Id: Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id EF3A38F9 ; Wed, 15 Nov 1995 23:02:43 +0100 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:05:18 -0500 Reply-To: John Cowan Sender: Lojban list From: John Cowan Subject: Re: TECH: man bites dog problem X-To: Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199511152104.QAA06504@locke.ccil.org> from "ucleaar" at Nov 15, 95 08:35:46 pm Content-Length: 1685 Lines: 43 mi joi la .and. cusku be di'e casnu > > > 1. I guess {re lo mu broda} becomes {re boi mu broda}. > > No, that's ungrammatical. "re lo mu broda" is scoped in conjunction, > > like "lo mu broda" (note that there must really be only five broda). > > So is there a way to say it? {re me lo mu broda}, I suppose. I think that is semantically ill-formed, as "ci lo re broda" would be. I think you need "re me ro lo mu broda", because what you have is "re mo su'o lo mu broda", two of the at-least-one of the five. > > > 2. How does {re broda} vs {re lo broda} help to disambiguate > > > A. re le mu nanmu cu batci ci le mu gerku > > > we still need a ruling on whether A. is 3 dogs or 6 dogs. > > Three dogs. To get six dogs, use: > > re me le mu nanmu cu batci ci me le mu gerku > > with the new definition of "me". This is equivalent to: > > re da poi me le mu nanmu vau ci de poi me le mu gerku zo'u da batci de > > Hmm. I see. Is {ci broda} equivalent to {ci me lo broda}? Yes, or rather "ci me ro lo broda" for the same reasons as above. > I'm still not sure how to {lo}-lessly do: > {mehi ro lo ci lo prenu cu klama} [under current system] > "There is a trio of people not all of whom are goers." > > My best guess is: > > mehi ro me ci prenu cu klama > mehi ro me ci lo prenu cu klama Yes, I believe either of those will work. I now feel that the possibility of this kind of thing is the best joint argument for TLI_style "me" (makes a predicate which is true of each of the sumti referents) and for "PA broda" = "PA DA poi broda" equivalence. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.