John E Clifford wrote:
Unfortunately, it can be argued that {lo'e} means
something different from the generalization that
was intended using {lo}. Just what the
difference is is not too clear, though {le'e}
pretty clearly brings in a subjective factor
absent from the others.
If we're talking about baseline {lo}, the difference is obvious. If I have understood xorlo correctly, the new {lo} makes no claims about what it precedes - it's the gadri equivalent of {pe}. In that case, the difference is simply that {lo'e} is more specific.
In the baseline usage, {lo gerku cu pendu lo remna} means "There is at least one thing that is actually a dog, that is a friend to one thing that is actually a human." The proposed new usage gives us something like (in Pidgin Chinese-proverb style) "dog friend man." I rather like this, but it is (intentionally) vague. It's not a generalisation, since that would be "Most dogs are friends to most men." It *could* mean that, but it doesn't have to. Using {lo'e} is simply more precise.
robin.tr --"I think perhaps the most important problem is that we are trying to understand the fundamental workings of the universe via a language devised for telling one another where the best fruit is." -- Terry Pratchett
Robin Turner IDMYO Bilkent Universitesi Ankara 06533 Turkey www.bilkent.edu.tr/~robin