RE: [lojban] no'a

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@ntlworld.com>]

Jorge:
> What do these mean?
> 
> 1- la djan ba klama lo zarci pu le nu la meris no'a
> 
> A) John will go to some store before Mary goes to it.
> B) John will go to some store before Mary goes to one.

C) John will go to some store before Mary is x1 of the next
outer bridi.

> 2- la djan ba klama ro zarci pu le nu la meris no'a
> 
> A) John will go to each store before Mary goes to it.
> B) John will go to every store before Mary goes to any.

C) ... before Mary is x1 of the next outer bridi.

> 3- la djan ba klama le zdani be vo'a pu le nu la meris no'a
> 
> A) John will go to his home before Mary goes there.
> B) John will go to his home before Mary goes to hers.

C) ... ditto

But let's change the examples to:

1- la djan ba klama lo zarci pu le nu la meris go'i
> 
> A) John will go to some store before Mary goes to it.
> B) John will go to some store before Mary goes to one.

2- la djan ba klama ro zarci pu le nu la meris go'i

> A) John will go to each store before Mary goes to it.
> B) John will go to every store before Mary goes to any.

3- la djan ba klama le zdani be vo'a pu le nu la meris go'i

which we had better rechange to:

3- la djan ba klama loi zdani be vo'a pu le nu la meris go'i

> A) John will go to his home before Mary goes there.
> B) John will go to his home before Mary goes to hers.

My answer is this: if, as in predicate logic, each quantifier
begins a new bridi, then by go'i-ing to the appropriate
bridi (outer, including the quantifier, or inner, not including
the quantifier), you could get both A and B readings, at least
for 1 & 2. 

If only Loglan had remained true to its logical origins. Then
these sorts of issues would not arise, and we'd have decent
ways of saying all of the A & B sentences.

--And.