Re: [lojban] Re: Holiday Present from the BPFK: The gadri Proposal Has Been Completed

["And Rosta" <a.rosta@v21.me.uk>]

Rob:
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 07:45:29PM -0000, And Rosta wrote:
> > This said, I don't understand how come "ci lo vo nanmu" quantifies
> > over the four referents of "lo vo nanmu", yet "ci loi vo nanmu"
> > quantifies not over the one referent of "loi vo nanmu" but
> > rather over the quasi-infinite number of things that "loi vo
> > nanmu" can refer to. It's not that I see anything objectionable
> > to this -- indeed, it's expressively a good thing -- but I don't
> > understand the basis for the claim about PA me <sumti>.
> 
> Well, for one thing, you can't quantify three of something that has one
> referent. That's as nonsensical as {ci le pa gerku}.
> 
> And where does the idea that {loi vo nanmu} has one referent come from? 

When I wrote that, I was thinking that the single referent was a group
of four men. But xorxes then explained that it fact there is an
indefinite number of referents (each of which is a group of four men).
I had been erroneously thinking that {loi vo nanmu} was analogical to 
{lo vo nanmu} rather than an abbreviation of {lo gunma be lo vo nanmu}.

> Is that the "Mr. Rabbit" (or "Mr. Man" in this case) concept that I've 
> never believed in?

No. (But what does 'believing in a concept' mean, anyway?)

--And.