[lojban] Re: na scope. Again.

[Jorge "Llambías" <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar>]

--- Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > (1) mi ge na nelci gi djica
> > > > (2) mi ge na nelci gi na djica
> > > > (3) mi na ge nelci gi djica
> 
> I don't see a semantic difference between (2) and (3); am I missing
> something?

(2) says I don't do either of them, (3) says I don't do both, i.e.
in (3) I may do one or none, but not both.

(2) is equivalent to:

(2') mi na ga nelci gi djica

and (3) is equivalent to:

(3') mi ga na nelci gi na djica 

> > > {mi naku nelci gi'e djica} would still be (3) though, right?
> > 
> > Right. And {mi nelci na gi'e djica} is unambiguously (1).
> 
> And {mi nelci na gi'e nai djica} is unambiguously (2).

Yes.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. 
www.yahoo.com