From arosta@uclan.ac.uk Wed Mar 13 05:06:57 2002
Return-Path: <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>
X-Sender: arosta@uclan.ac.uk
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: unknown); 13 Mar 2002 13:06:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 36353 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2002 13:06:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167)
  by m2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Mar 2002 13:06:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO com1.uclan.ac.uk) (193.61.255.3)
  by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Mar 2002 13:06:55 -0000
Received: from gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk by com1.uclan.ac.uk with SMTP (Mailer);
          Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:39:33 +0000
Received: from DI1-Message_Server by gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk
          with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:06:15 +0000
Message-Id: <sc8f4ec7.032@gwise-gw1.uclan.ac.uk>
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5.2
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:06:11 +0000
To: lojban <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] More about quantifiers
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
From: And Rosta <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=810630
X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 13667

pc:
#<Further, if Jorge and pc want to propose comprehensive
#systems for importing and nonimporting quantifiers, they
#should be done solely on the basis of "da poi ke'a", since
#only such a system will generalize to all cases. In this
#respect, Jorge's and pc's proposals are equally defective.>
#
#How disappointing!  But it does provide a nice agreeable ending for the=20
#discussion.  Except that we now have no forms for the people who seem #to =
want - forms.  Not a great loss, I think, but they (and I rather think & an=
d=20
#surely xorxes are in the group) will want to protest.  Well, let them come=
 up=20
#with a good answer, then.

"ro da ga broda gi na brode" is effectively nonimporting, since it
doesn't entail "da brode".=20

Perhaps "ro lu'a lo'i broda" is not importing either -- I don't think that'=
s
been discussed at all.

I have to concede that, from my *severely* limited knowledge of
restricted quantification, r.q. is importing, so if "da poi" is, as the
syntax obviously suggests, r.q., then "ro da poi ke'a broda" entails=20
"su'o da broda". And if "lo broda" is an abbreviation of "da poi ke'a=20
broda" then "ro broda" must entail "su'o da broda".

So, although my dialect is the same as Jorge's, I think I shall have
to switch sides to pc, and declare myself to have been Wrong.

I am fairly confident that this entire thread will have zero effect on
usage, but the participants seem to have derived pleasure from it,
which is enough.

--And.