Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 11:51:03 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199712151651.LAA00730@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: And Rosta Sender: Lojban list From: And Rosta Organization: University of Central Lancashire Subject: Re: whether (was Re: ni, jei, perfectionism) X-To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 886 X-From-Space-Date: Mon Dec 15 11:51:04 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Jorge to Lojbab: > To see the difference between {ce'u} and {makau} it is useful > to consider examples where they appear together. For instance: > > la rik zmadu la alis le ka ce'u mitre makau > Rick exceeds Alice in how much they measure. > > {ce'u} stands for the holder of the property, in this case Rick > and Alice. {makau} is the question that has to be answered, > in this case in order to make a comparison. BTW, this type of Q-kau that we get with zmadu and frica (and certain other selbri) is semantically very different from the sort we get with epistemic selbri. The essence of Q-kau here is where we have two variables, where the value of each depends on the value of the other. Currently I think that it is glico influence that makes us use Q-kau here. That said, it is the only way to do it if we insist on using {zmadu/frica fi le ka}. --And