> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Michael Turniansky
> <
mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2011/5/30 Jorge Llambías <
jjllambias@gmail.com>:
>>> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 7:48 PM, .arpis. <
rpglover64+jbobau@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Specifically, in the restricted case,
>>>> (assuming there are no cat-dogs in the universe) what does {ro da poi ke'a
>>>> gerku je mlatu cu broda} mean?
>>>
>>> It means:
>>>
>>> ro da zo'u ganai da gerku je mlatu gi da broda
>>>
>>> it means that whether there are cat-dogs or not.
>>>
>>>> Is it false, true, meaningless?
>>>
>>> If there are no cat-dogs, it's true, since for every value of da it
>>> will be false that da gerku je mlatu.
>>
>> Which is precisely why I say that every "lo no broda cu brode"
>> construction is also true. But no one seems to believe me :,-(
>
> "Precisely why"?
>
> You are using a referring _expression_ that doesn't refer. That's
> something that requires at least some explanation of some arbitratry
> conventions.
>
> The truth of "ro da zo'u ga naku da broda gi da brode" when "da broda"
> is false for every value of the variable "da" does not require any
> special convention.