From lojban-out@lojban.org Mon Jun 13 11:55:38 2005
Return-Path: <lojban-out@lojban.org>
X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 96816 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2005 18:55:35 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166)
  by m23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 13 Jun 2005 18:55:35 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.81.49.134)
  by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Jun 2005 18:55:35 -0000
Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50)
	id 1Dhu5l-0004QR-G7
	for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:55:25 -0700
Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.49.134])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1Dhu5C-0004Ow-1l; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:54:52 -0700
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:54:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.50)
	id 1Dhu4y-0004Ok-Ac
	for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:54:36 -0700
Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.203])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1Dhu4v-0004OT-R8
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:54:36 -0700
Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so63644wri
        for <lojban-list@lojban.org>; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:54:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.54.30.40 with SMTP id d40mr2714429wrd;
        Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:54:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.54.67.20 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 11:54:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <925d17560506131154393cda2b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 15:54:32 -0300
In-Reply-To: <20050613182017.70553.qmail@web81306.mail.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: <925d17560506130949b9adcf8@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20050613182017.70553.qmail@web81306.mail.yahoo.com>
X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--)
X-archive-position: 10155
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?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <lojban-out@lojban.org>
Reply-To: jjllambias@gmail.com
Subject: [lojban] Re: Un-definite quantifier.
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=7tCJnTu1u0tgz2twn1jKqwiKekALDAlOIhmbfVcero1nuHt0EA
X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 24526

On 6/13/05, John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> --- Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> > {lo broda} without quantifiers behaves just as
> > {le broda}
> > withouth quantifiers, and indeed like any other
> > sumti without
> > quantifiers.
> 
> If this is true, then the meaning of {le} has
> changed even more radically than that of {lo} --
> and now defintely to the dtriment of
> expressibility in Lojban.  This may actually have
> happened since I have seen {le broda} equated
> with {lo "broda"}, as though accurate description
> were the significant difference.

The significant difference is specificity. 

{le namcu} "the number(s) I have in mind".
{le pavyseljirna} "the unicorn(s) I have in mind".
{le gerku} "the dog(s) I have in mind".

{lo namcu} "number(s)"
{lo pavyseljirna} "unicorn(s)"
{lo gerku} "dog(s)"

The difference doesn't affect how they behave vis-a-vis
quantification, which is the same in all cases:

 PA <sumti> = PA da poi ke'a me <sumti>

mu'o mi'e xorxes