Re: Analogy

[ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>]

Jorge:
> > 1)      ro da poi broda cu brode
> > 2)      ro da poi broda zo'u da brode
> > 3)      ro broda cu brode
> >
> > are strictly equivalent in meaning, and imply nothing about the existence
> > of widgets.
>
> I agree that those are equivalent. I don't see any difference between
> {lo broda} and {da poi broda} either

Is there (I ask) a difference along the lines of (i-ii)?

  (i) Ex A(x) & B(x)   [There is an x such that x is an A and x is a B]
  (ii) Ex A(x) -> B(x) [There is an x such that if x is an A then x is a B]

The second one doesn't claim there is an A.

---
And