RE: [jboske] lo/le definition

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@lycos.co.uk>]

John:
> And Rosta scripsit:
> 
> > So do you accept that {lo blanu} does not mean the same as 
> > {da poi blanu}, then?
> 
> No, not for blanu. 

Does that mean you do think that {lo blanu} != {da poi blanu},
or that you think they do mean the same? (Please don't just
answer Yes! -- This is an alternatives question.)

> Some brivla places subcategorize for "set" or
> "mass", and lo-constructions involving them generate sets or masses
> respectively, but they are sets or masses *seen as* individuals 

--And.