Date:  Thu, 20 Nov 1997 21:49:00 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199711210249.VAA02433@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Subject:      Re: singular/plural (was: Re: veridicality in English)
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 627
X-From-Space-Date: Thu Nov 20 21:49:00 1997
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

la and la lojbab na'e darno le ka tugni
>It looks like we're not far from agreeing.
>
>We agree that {le pa} and {lei} are scope-insensitive.

Right.

>{pa lo} and {loi} are not sensitive to scope relative to other
>existential quantifiers (I think),

{[su'o] lo} and {[pisu'o] loi} are not sensitive to scope relative
to other existentials. But {pa lo} is a different story:

     lo prenu cu prami pa lo prenu
     There is at least one person that loves exactly one person.
     [TRUE]

    pa lo prenu cu se prami lo prenu
    There is exactly one person that is loved by at least one person.
    [FALSE]

co'o mi'e xorxes