| In a message dated 9/1/2001 7:21:49 PM Central Daylight Time,
jjllambias@hotmail.com writes: The Lojban version allows: {la pol djuno le du'u da klama le zarci}. I'm not sure it does: Would {da} count as an answerr to {ma klamale zarci}? I don't think so; there is a relevance/informativeness condition on answers, sure. {le klama be le zarci} also won't do. < ko'a ko'e frica lo ka makau mamta ce'u means: There is at least one x, member of {lo'i ka makau mamta ce'u} such that FRICA(ko'a,ko'e,x) is true. Show me such an x, then! You are saying that the scope of the quantifier in {lo ka makau mamta ce'u} is not the whole bridi, that the x3 is somehow within an "intensional context". I don't think we can exclude particular places such as the x3 of frica from the general rule. We've already had this discussion about sisku, nitcu, et al.> I don't think that {frica} creates an intensional context in the way that {nitcu} and maybe {sisku) do, so I don't have that out (which do apply in some cases, however, or else we get needless falsehoods to easily). But, suppose that the mothers involved are ko'i and ko'o. Then the setmuch contain {ka ko'i mamte ce'u} and {ka ko'o mamte ce'u} and both of thesework, applying to one and not the other. |