[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: whether (was Re: ni, jei, perfectionism)
- To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
- Subject: Re: whether (was Re: ni, jei, perfectionism)
- From: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
- Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 11:51:03 -0500 (EST)
- Organization: University of Central Lancashire
- Reply-to: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
- Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
Jorge to Lojbab:
> To see the difference between {ce'u} and {makau} it is useful
> to consider examples where they appear together. For instance:
>
> la rik zmadu la alis le ka ce'u mitre makau
> Rick exceeds Alice in how much they measure.
>
> {ce'u} stands for the holder of the property, in this case Rick
> and Alice. {makau} is the question that has to be answered,
> in this case in order to make a comparison.
BTW, this type of Q-kau that we get with zmadu and frica (and
certain other selbri) is semantically very different from
the sort we get with epistemic selbri. The essence of Q-kau here
is where we have two variables, where the value of each depends
on the value of the other.
Currently I think that it is glico influence that makes us use
Q-kau here. That said, it is the only way to do it if we
insist on using {zmadu/frica fi le ka}.
--And