Message-ID: <349E9A09.7143@locke.ccil.org> Date: Mon, 22 Dec 1997 11:49:13 -0500 From: John Cowan Organization: Lojban Peripheral X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lojban List Subject: Re: xor questions (was Re: indirect Qs (was Re: On logji lo References: <199712221401.JAA17328@locke.ccil.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1352 X-From-Space-Date: Mon Dec 22 11:49:13 1997 X-From-Space-Address: - da cusku di'e > >Well, feel free to quote Book at me as well, but so far as I am > >concerned they're not the same. For example: {lu'a lu'i ci girzu} > >is "a member of a set of three groups", i.e., one of the three groups, Correct. > >whereas {lu'a ci girzu} is "a member of three groups", not one of the > >three groups but a common member of the three. la lojbab. cusku di'e > I am pretty sure the last is invalid, by perhaps Cowan will speak up. I think that "lu'a" is vacuous (not invalid) when placed before a non-set, non-mass sumti. The trouble with the above interpretation is that then we don't know what to make of "lu'a ci gerku": a common "member" of three dogs? Note that "lu'i" can be (somewhat) usefully iterated: lu'i lu'i ci gerku A set whose sole member is a set whose members are three dogs. > That was the other, later, use of lu'a - to allow grouped sumti to > be labelled with a relative clause. The earliest use, though was defined > for lu'i alone, and was specifically to allow selection of a number > of members from a set, such as the "Would you like coffee, tea, milk, or water?" > without requiring impossibly complex connective statements This usage of "lu'i", however, is now OBSOLETE, having been replaced by "lu'a". -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban