Message-Id: <199602110654.IAA11045@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Sun, 11 Feb 1996 01:35:39 +0100
Reply-To: Goran Topic <topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Goran Topic <topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR>
Subject:      Re: PLI: "except"
To: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1584
Lines: 54

Translation follows.

> something like: "As everyone expected, that was important not only
> to the Irish".

.i .uenai vajni loi po'onai se gugdrneire

> This one is also not grammatical. I don't really know how to do
> the quantifier "some but not all".

.i lu pabi'ida'a li'u co'e .i .io.i'e la lojbab. cu morji su'o drata
vlapoi noi .uu na pe'i drani .iku'i mi na birti

({pabi'ida'a}. lojbab, very commendably, thought up several others,
but I am afraid that they are incorrect. I am not sure, though.)

cu'u la lojbab.

> Too busy proposing new Lojban constructs and not enough time studying
> the old???
>
> How about veisu'obi'ida'a?
> da'asu'eda'a
> da'asu'e
> da'ada'a

.i lida'asu'e lida'a vei no xunai bi'i pave'o lida'ano bi'i da'apa
lirobi'ida'a lisu'oda'apa du

.i lida'ada'a lida'a da'apa lipa du

.i lisu'obi'ida'a liveipa bi'i rove'o bi'i da'apa lipabi'iro lisu'o du

.i lida'asu'eda'a lida'a veino bi'i da'apave'o liro bi'i pa lisu'o du

no'i va'o lepo'onu lisu'e na ka'e du lino kei lu da'asu'eda'a li'u drani

.i lida'asu'eda'a lida'avei pa bi'i da'apave'o li da'a bi'i pa du

(I don't think the latter two are correct. I am not certain, though.
da'asu'e = n-(0..1) = (n-0)..(n-1) = (n-1)..n = su'oda'a
da'ada'a = n-(n-1) = n-n+1 = 1 = pa
su'obi'ida'a = (1..n)..(n-1) = 1..n = su'o
da'asu'eda'a = n-(0..(n-1)) = n..1 = su'o

Only in case su'e can't be 0 is {da'asu'eda'a} OK:
da'asu'eda'a = n-(1..(n-1)) = (n-1)..1)

> BTW. da'aexisting does seem to me to imply that we intended that ro
> imply existence, or at least assumed it tacitly.

ki'a?

co'o mi'e. goran.