RE: [lojban] tu'o again (was: the set of answers

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

Xod:
> On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, And Rosta wrote:
> > there was agreement that {tu'o} couldn't sensically mean both "null operand"
> > and "non-specific/elliptical number", and John opined that it should mean
> > only "null operand". I agree with him.
>
> What does "null operand" mean? Does it mean a number-substitute for
> situations where no number can fit? I can't think of any such example,
> though. Even with the concept of Universe, of which there is by definition
> only one, it is modernly considered that there may be a multitude of them.

"null operand" means "mekso equivalent of zi'o". When it is argument of an
n-ary operator it converts the operator to a (n-1)-ary operator.

But since it is a PA, it can grammatically occur in a quantifier position,
but with no obvious meaning. Then Jorge suggested using it in contexts
where a quantifier/gadri is grammatically mandatory but logically otiose
and odious. (E.g. for sumti derived from selbri "x1 is the proposition
2+2=4", "x1 is the colour blue", "x1 is Xod", and so on.)

--And.