RE: [lojban] Re: The Any thread

["Craig" <ragnarok@pobox.com>]

>> But, doctors do exist, and if they didn't there wouldn't be one I don't
>> need. And claims that the existence of a specific doctor that I don't
need
>> falsifies my reading of "mi nitcu lo mikce", but I claim the existence of
a
>> specific doctor that I do need would falsify it, and e is just
>> misinterpreting.

>The existence of one or more doctors that fail the need test ("need not"
>is not a negation of "need" in English, leading to still more confusion)
>*does* falsify "mi nitcu lo mikce", which is good evidence that it does
>not translate "I need a doctor, any doctor", but rather means "There
>is/are doctor(s) that I need."

This is what the Any interpretation means! No specific doctor is needed.
None. However, I do need a doctor, and when that doctor shows up e is likely
to be specific.

"I need a doctor" in English usually means "I need Any doctor", which would
be false if:
1. There is a specific doctor that I need. I could then still need a doctor,
but I wouldn't need Any doctor, which is what I interpret lojban "mi nitcu
lo mikce" as meaning. Maybe it's just a glico bias, but I also think that my
interpretation makes more sense.
OR
2. My need can be filled without a doctor. Then I don't need a doctor.