[lojban-beginners] Re: Absolute and relative quantifiers

[Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>]

On Saturday 05 September 2009 15:12:25 Squark Rabinovich wrote:
> Hello everyone!
> According the *xamoi ckupau* of the "reference grammar", the usual outer
> quantifier of a mass/set is something beginning with *pi* e.g. *piro
> *,*pisu'o *,* pici* . That is, we specify which portion of the whole the
> mass/set comprises. However, what if I want to specify the exact number?
> For instance
>
> *pinonononononononopa loi remna cu bevri le pipno*
>
> means that the piano was carried by a mass of humans, numbered earth
> population x 1E-9, that is, about 7 people. However, what is I want to
> specify the exact number of people comprising the mass? Is it legitimate to
> say
>
> *ze loi remna cu bevri le pipno*

"ze loi remna" should be "ze lo remna". "ze loi remna" means seven times a 
mass of men, which doesn't make much sense.

> On the other hand, what if I want to use a relative quantifier with
> individuals? For instance, can I say
>
> *pici le nanmu ca tavla*
> *
> *
> In the sense that "a third of the men are/were/will be talking" (not
> necessarily to each other or together in some other way)?

"pici le nanmu" means "three tenths of the man", that is, 0.3 of some man 
included in "le nanmu". You mean "fi'uci lei nanmu". li fi'uci du li 
pira'eci.

There's also "piro", which means "all of" when used with masses. As a number, 
piro is equal to 1. ro, on the other hand, is not equal to 1 unless there's 
only one thing; it's equal to the number of things in the set.

Then there's "da'a", which is equal to ro-1. I don't know what "pida'a" would 
mean.

Pierre