Re: [lojban] A serious but ungeneralized new attempt on Q-kau [retractions]

[pycyn@aol.com]

Boy, I REALLY have to do this stuff at 3 am rather than 8pm!

In a message dated 9/6/2001 7:58:08 PM Central Daylight Time,
a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com writes:

No, for two reasons. First of all, you need "poi ge jetnu gi du'u
da prami de" to be a restriction on da and on de, but it isn't. As
it stands, you're claiming that ko'a knows that everything loves
everything. IIRC, though, there is a way to get one relative clause to
modify two conjoined sumti, but I can't remember offhand how to do it.

Second, and more seriously, it doesn't cover cases where da prami no de
and no da prami de.

Both points are right ({poi} is not conditional with {su'o} as it sorta is
with {ro}) and "nobody" can, of course, be an answer in other than
presupposition fights.  I am still not sure that it enters directly into this
case, however, since it does not seem to be in the answers to "Who loves
whom?" -- at least directly (we can infer from the absence of a name in one
category or the other, I suppose).  

roda rode zo'u ganai da prami de gige di du'u da prami de gi la pol djuno di

I am not sure whether to patch for the "nobody" case