[lojban] Re: A (rather long) discussion of {all}

["Jorge Llambías" <lojban-out@lojban.org>]

On 5/23/06, Maxim Katcharov <maxim.katcharov@gmail.com> wrote:
> Overall I don't think that it's a good idea to have {lo} not marked.

It's a very good thing to be able to be precise when you need/want to.
It is also a very good thing not to be forced to be precise when you
don't need/want to.

> You should be able to say the following:
>
> {??? nanmu cu bevri lo pa pipno}
> e1: individually, two (and only two) of the group of two men carried the piano.
> e2: individually, all of the group of two men carried the piano
> e3: together, two (and only two) of the group of two men carried the piano.
> e4: together, all of the group of two men carried the piano
>
> 1-4 I would say are:
>
> 1: {re lo vo nanmu cu bevri lo pa pipno}
> 2: {ro lo vo ...}
> 3: {ro loi vo ...} / {lu'o re lo vo ...}
> 4: {ro loi vo ...} / {lu'o ro lo vo ...}

Ah, you meant inner {vo}, I was a bit confused by your versions in English,
where you wrote "two" instead of "four". Agreed for 1 and 2, and also
for the {lu'o} version of 3 and 4, although {loi} instead of {lu'o} would be
grammatical there too, so they would probably be preferred:
{loi re lo vo nanmu...} and {loi ro lo vo nanmu}.

> Forget distributivity/non distributivity. Before we even consider
> them, we have to agree on this: the inner says "this is the quantity
> of the group that I am referring to",

Corrrect.

> and the outer says "this is the
> number of that group that I am going to say something about".

Not quite. You are going to say something about all the things you are
referring to, why else would you want to refer to them? To see this more
clearly, consider this example: there is a row of four chairs, with a person
sitting on each of the chairs and another person standing behind it.
We can say:

(1)     vo le bi prenu cu zutse
        Exactly four of the eight people are sitting.

(2)     naku mu le bi prenu cu zutse
        It is not the case that exactly five of the eight people are sitting.

(3)     ro le vo sanli cu trixe pa le vo zutse
        Each of the four standers is behind exactly one of the sitters.

Now, perhaps in (1) you can imagine that you are selecting a group
of four to say something about them, but which group of five are you
selecting in (2), and which one of the sitters are you selecting in (3)?
In (1) you are saying something about the eight people: that exactly
four of them are sitting. In (2) you are saying something about the eight
people: that it is not the case that exactly five of them are sitting. In
(3) you are saying something about the four standers and the four
sitters: that each of the first ones is behind exactly one of the second
ones.

> And finally, what {lu'a} and {lu'o} mean to you, if they mean anything.

lu'o = lo gunma be
lu'a = lo cmima be

mu'o mi'e xorxes


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.