From lojban-out@lojban.org Thu May 19 07:39:00 2005 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 84558 invoked from network); 19 May 2005 14:39:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m29.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 May 2005 14:39:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134) by mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 May 2005 14:39:00 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DYmAs-0003ce-UQ for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:38:58 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYmAE-0003cF-IH; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:38:26 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Thu, 19 May 2005 07:38:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1DYmA3-0003c1-4x for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:38:07 -0700 Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.197]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DYm9r-0003bK-3Z for lojban-list@lojban.org; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:38:07 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so766081wri for ; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:37:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.50.46 with SMTP id x46mr1119748wrx; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:37:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.67.20 with HTTP; Thu, 19 May 2005 07:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <925d175605051907374306205a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 11:37:22 -0300 In-Reply-To: <20050519111254.74956.qmail@web32115.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis Content-Disposition: inline References: <20050519111254.74956.qmail@web32115.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-archive-position: 9978 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 64.81.49.134 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0 X-eGroups-From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= Reply-To: jjllambias@gmail.com Subject: [lojban] Re: {le} and {lo}. X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 24350 On 5/19/05, Opi Lauma wrote: > 1. le gerku - the dog(s) > (one speaks about dog(s) which has/have been defined > earlier). > > 2. ci le gerku - three of the dogs > (one speaks about some three (it is not known which > three exactly) dogs from earlier defined group of > dogs). More or less. Outer quantifiers are not used to refer, so when you use {ci le gerku} you are not speaking about some three dogs, you are speaking about the whole group {le gerku}. The quantifier just says how many of that group satisfy some property. For example: ci le gerku cu nenri le zdani no le gerku cu blabi ro le gerku cu xekri In all three sentences you are speaking of the whole group of dogs, {le gerku}. In each sentence, you give information about the whole group: that none of the dogs are white, that each of the dogs is black, and that exactly three of the dogs are inside the house. So for me, it doesn't really make much sense to say that in the first sentence you are speaking about some three of the dogs, just as it doesn't make sense to say that in the second sentence you are speaking about none of the dogs, but we probably understand the sentence the same way anyway. > > 3. le ci gerku - the three dogs > (one speaks about the three earlier defined dogs). > > 4. re le ci gerku > (one speaks about some two dogs, from earlier defined > group consisting of three dogs). > I think that it is no use to say the two dogs of the > three dogs {le re le ci gerku}, since if we know which > two dogs it is spoken about, we do not need to know to > which group of dogs these two dogs belong. Did I > correctly understand everything? {le re le ci gerku} could be used in some context to select one group out of another, but it is rare, yes. > About {lo}. Is it right that {lo gerku} = {le N > gerku}, where N is a number of all {gerku} in the > world? All of those dogs existing alive at the moment of speaking? {lo gerku} does not in general have such a precise meaning. It just means "dogs", or "a dog" in a generic way. For example to say that the dog is man's best friend you would use {lo gerku}: {lo gerku cu xagrai pendo lo remna}. mu'o mi'e xorxes