Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: ci lo gerku vs lo ci gerku

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:41 AM, ranoritc <ranorith@gmail.com> wrote:
> ionai la xorlo na'e ciste fi lo selklani po zo lo i ni'i la'edi'u lu
> lo gerku cu blabi li'u selsmuni lu lo no gerku cu blabi li'u xu i si'a
> selsmuni lu lo piso'a gerku cu blabi li'u xu i si'a selsmuni lu lo
> mo'a gerku cu blabi li'u zo'o i selbebna .i
>
> Ranorith
>
> Yuck, I really hate how xorlo specifies that lo "has no default
> quantifiers". Does that mean if I say "lo gerku cu blabi" this is a
> fine generalisation of "lo no gerku cu blabi"? What about "lo piso'a
> gerku cu blabi"? Or perhaps "lo mo'a gerku cu blabi"? So silly.

Indeed that's silly, but I don' t follow your reasoning. I say that
"lo" has nothing to do with quantifiers, and you ask whether "lo" can
have some more or less absurd hidden quantifiers? Just forget about
any connection between "lo" and quantifiers. Is "lo gerku cu blabi" a
fine generalization of "lo zirpu gerku cu blabi" because "lo" has no
default color? Is "lo gerku" a fine generalization of "lo fetsi gerku"
because "lo" has no  hidden gender? What about "lo fetsi najenai nakni
gerku"? Or does "lo" have a default "fetsi ja nakni" gender? "lo" has
nothing to do with color, it has nothing to do with gender, and it has
nothing to do with number. That doesn't mean you can assume there are
hidden crazy colors, genders or numbers when you use "lo".

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
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.