Return-Path: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@vms.dc.LSOFT.COM Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id DAA21796 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 03:10:36 +0200 Message-Id: <199512200110.DAA21796@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi> Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D0309CEA ; Wed, 20 Dec 1995 2:10:35 +0100 Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 20:10:09 -0500 Reply-To: Jorge Llambias Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: TECH: {loi} & {loe} X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu, jorge@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 763 Lines: 19 And: > 4. Instead, I reckon that PA + lVi should be a collectivized counterpart > of PA + lV: How does one state the cardinality of the collectivity? Well, > if {loi broda} is a group containing suo lo broda, then {ci loi broda} > should be a group containing 3 broda. I like that very much. Currently, the only way to say "three men carried the piano" is {lu'o ci lo nanmu cu bevri le pipno}. I agree with And that {ci loi nanmu cu bevri le pipno} would be much better. If that is agreed, then the default quantifiers should be {su'o loi ro broda} and {ro lei su'o broda}, in parallel with lo/le. > **************************** > I very much hope that this is my final word on gadri. As far as I'm concerned, your summary makes sense. Jorge