Re: TECH: Any old thing whatsoever (was RE: do djica loi ckafi je'i

[Jorge Llambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>]

> Back to present, Mark Shoulson reporting.
>
> That said, it looks to me like there may be more than one thing at work
> here.  On the one hand, things like "I like tennis"" or "I like women"
> should use "loi".

Agreed.

> But "I need a box" (and possibly tho not necessarily I need a taxi) may be
> different, since you're not referring in general... precisely because *NOT*
> "any of" the mass will do.

I think I may be changing my mind.

What confused me was the quantification of loi as "part of the mass of..."

{mi nitcu loi tanxe} could well mean that the _whole_ mass of boxes is
such that I need it, and since the properties of the individuals are
also the properties of the mass, then as long as I need one of them
I need the whole mass. Actually, there isn't one box such that I need it,
but the mass has more properties than each individual, so we'd still be ok.

> A full box won't help you.  Ormaybe "lei" will
> help there.  I dunno..

It doesn't matter. You're saying that the mass of boxes has the property
that you need it, not that the components of that mass have the property.

This makes me wonder what's the point of quantifying {loi} with anything
other than {piro}, since anything that is true for one quantification
should be true for any other.

So {mi nitcu piro loi tanxe} might make sense for "I need a box", but
is very counterintuitive.

The new problem is that "I need a box" doesn't mean that I need any box
whatsoever. Maybe I need a big box, in which case "I need a box" is true,
but "I need any box whatsoever" is not. And I don't think {lei} helps,
it's not a matter of specific boxes...

> For consideration...

Enough for today, I'm going home.

Jorge