[lojban-beginners] Re: {le} and {lo}

[Ben Foppa <eatingstaples@gmail.com>]

> {mi citka lo badna} vs {mi citka le badna}

> {mi citka lo badna} is definitely true.  I have indeed eaten bananas.
> I like them a lot!  On the other hand, when it comes to {mi citka le
> badna}, before I know whether it's true or not, I'll have to ask you
> *which banana* we're talking about.  Get it?

This seems to mirror "the" and "a/an" very closely: I have eaten a
banana; whether or not I have eaten THE banana depends on which banana
we're talking about.

> OK so it gets a little confusing and very unenglishy: Any time you can
> use {le}, you could also use {lo}.  Think about it: If for some
> particular banana I can say about it {mi citka le badna}, then it's
> also true as a general proposition that {mi citka lo badna}.  No one
> eats a particular banana without becoming, in general, a banana-eater.

This is very English-y! Anytime I can use "the" (except in the obscure
general case, like "The red-spotted panda eats figs", where we're not
actually being specific), I can use "a/an". I jumped on the roof, I
jumped on a roof; I ate the banana, I ate a banana. It's equally true,
but less specific.

> The confusion is deepened by the fact that we consider {mi citka lo
> badna} a reasonable way to talk about a particular event of eating a
> banana.  There's no reason you have to be specific about the banana in
> question to say "I'm a banana eater" and mean that you've just eaten
> one.

Again, mirrors "a/an" very closely. Though, based on what you said, I
get the impression that in English, when we say "I ate a banana" it
implies more heavily that I JUST NOW ate a banana, where in Lojban,
that's not as heavily implied.

So far, I understand that {lo} does not perfectly mirror "a/an", but
is more of a generic reference. If I were to make a computer science
reference, it sounds like {lo} would imply a statement about a class,
rather than an object.

{le}, however, seems much more obscure. When would one ever use it? It
seems that for most any conversation, {le} would be unnecessary, since
most objects are introduced before they are referenced, and then
{bi'unai} would be used to reference it again. Could someone give an
example of when using {le} is actually useful, and why "the" wouldn't
work in the equivalent English statement?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.