On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:00 AM, ianek <janek37= @gmail.com> wrote:

> The reason he says {mi'a ponse

> lo xunre jipci je bakni} is false is because he is r= eferring to them as
> individuals.

So if I'm referring to them as a group, then {mi'a ponse lo x= unre
jipci je bakni} is true, right? And the sentence is not wrong, only
one interpretation is wrong?

Yes. In order to ensure t= hat only the intended interpretation is=20 derived by the audience, you must either be explicit about whether you=20 are referring to the object(s) individually (with "PA lo broda") = or as a group/set (with "loi broda"/"lo'i broda"), or allo= w context to make the distinction for you, which is in itself usually enough.

Oh, how I love = Lojban, the unambiguous
language.

Syntactically unambiguous, which means t= hat there are no instances where a word or phrase can be confused with a di= fferent word or phrase, (such with English to, too, and two, or the famous = "pretty little girls' school" example).

Semantically, Lojban is no less ambiguous than any other language, and = is often more so, because of the rather vague- bu intention- meanings of th= e words.
=A0

On 17 Maj, 09:50, Jonathan Jones <e= yeo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 1:18 AM, ianek <jane...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Also, I still don't see any difference in meaning between {br= oda} and
> > {me lo broda}.
>
> Well, obviously, it's the place structure.

Of course I knew that, I meant the semantics of the x1 place.

> {mi klama} means "I go from somewhere to somewhere by some route = using some
> means"/"I am-a-go-er from somewhere to somewhere by some rou= te using some
> means" (and all the various different tenses of those).
>
> {mi me lo klama} means "I am amongst-those-that-are-(something th= at goes
> from somewhere to somewhere by some route using some means) in some as= pect".
>
> You have to remember that unfilled places are always implicitly filled= with
> "zo'e", as well, so those two above are actually {mi kla= ma zo'e zo'e zo'e
> zo'e} and {mi me lo klama be zo'e bei zo'e bei zo'e be= i zo'e be'o zo'e},
> respectively.

I remember that, obviously.
That doesn't answer my question. If I go, then I'm amongst those th= at
are goers. If I'm amongst those that are goers, then I go. Am I right?<= br> If so, then there's no difference in meaning of the x1 place between {klama} and {me lo klama}. And the meaning of me2 is very unclear, as
I remember from the discussion about it here.

mu'o mi'e ianek

As far= as the x1 is concerned, no, I don't believe there is any difference. &= quot;me" is most useful when wanting to describe things which have no = brivla, such as in {mi me la.djan.}