RE: [lojban] Re: Any (was: Nick will be with you shortly)

["Craig" <ragnarok@pobox.com>]

>> >> > But "mi djica lo mikce" is true under different circumstances than
>> >> > "mi djica <any> mikce".  It's clearer if you translate to english;
>> >> > the first:  There is a doctor (some doctors) that I need.  The
>> >> > second:  I need any doctor(s).
>> >>
>> >> Are you trying to say "n'importe quel"? I think the way to say this is
>> "lo <x>
>> >> mikce", where "<x>" is some discursive in UI, though I'm not sure
which.
>>
>> >That was xod's argument.  "lo da'icu'i mikce", etc.
>>
>> >However this still doesn't solve the problem.  "lo mikce" has to
>> >be the same as "da poi mikce".  "I need some doctor" or "There is
>> >a doctor that I need".  It cannot do "I need any doctor".
>>
>> What you think 'lo mikce' means, re-expressed with das, is 'pada poi
mikce'.
>> 'da poi mikce' (= 'lo mikce') means ANY da that mikce. Similar to how 'da
na
>> prane prenu' means 'nobody is perfect', not 'somebody is imperfect'.

>No, I think it means su'o da.  Forgive me for forgetting to put (s)
>things on the glosses, I figured people would realize that.  Anyway,
>"I need a doctor" or "I need any doctor" in English talks about
>*one* doctor.  You can also say "I need two doctors" (or "any two
>doctors") with the Any meaning.  "da poi mikce" means "There is a
>thing which is a mikce, and for which ...".

mi nitcu da. Let's start with that. Do you at least agree that there isn't a
specific thing which I mean that I need?
Okay, good. Now onto da poi mikce. That means that the da must be a doctor,
but ads no further restrictions.
Now onto lo. mi nitcu lo mikce = mi nitcu da poi mikce. We already agreed on
that one.
Therefore, I am expressing Any with this usage. QED.