On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 7:28 PM, selpa'i <= ;m...@plasmatix.com> wrote:

On 21.05.2013= 00:24, Ian Johnson wrote:

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 6:12 PM, v4hn <m...@v4hn.de> wrote:=

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 05:49:08PM -0400, Ian Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 5:40 PM, v4hn <m...@v4hn.de> w= rote:
> > {pa le karci} or {pa karci} (if a number preceeds the bridi you d= on't necessarily
> > need an article, you can think about this as {pa lo karci}) can b= e used
> > for that, an inner quantifier is not needed here.
>
> {pa karce} is rather unlikely to mean what you want. In particular it = does
> *NOT* mean the same as {pa lo karce}. Instead it actually means exactl= y
> what {pa lo karce} meant before xorlo was implemented, that is "there<= br> > exists exactly one car such that ..."

Agreed, I never use that and got confused when reading

lo with an outer quantifier, which is exactly the same thing
as just sticking a number before an item (i.e. "mu lo bakni" =3D=3D "mu bak= ni"
=3D=3D "five cows), works pretty much as before: "five things that really a= re cows".

at http://www.lojban.org/tiki/How+to+use+xorlo [1] . Someone= might want to rephrase that.

mi'e la .van. mu'o

Oh wow, that's not good at all, that's completely inconsistent with
the formal definition in the proposal proper...

That's exactly the part that got changed in December 2011, when the sentenc= e "When an outer quantifier is used without an inner quantifier, ''lo'' can= be omitted." was removed. This means that "PA broda =3D PA lo broda" *was*= part of the original BPFK-approved proposal from '04. (the recent change w= asn't followed by another round of voting of course)

In any case, I don't think there is *such* a big difference between PA brod= a and PA lo broda. Both make claims about instances that broda, and neither= of them select in-mind referents. It probably depends on one's conceptuali= zation of lo broda.

mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

I think it's a marked difference no m= atter how you think of lo and da--{lo} definitely allows for referents to b= e in the universe of discourse and not selected, whereas {da} does not. Tha= t is, {PA lo broda} takes exactly PA things from {lo broda}, which might be= quite small compared to the whole UD worth of brodas. {PA broda} takes exa= ctly PA things from the entire UD worth of brodas. This is already far too = technical for the beginners list though.