Re: Lojban Mad-libs?

["Jorge J. Llambías" <jorge@intermedia.com.ar>]

la robin cusku di'e

>.a'u pe'u ko cusku lo tordu mupli
>
>{fu'e zo'o} that's {lo} in the sense of something-that-really-is.  I am not
>inferring that there exists a short example such that I am asking you to
express
>it {fu'o}

I agree that's what it means. Of the two possibilities:

(1) I request that there be a short example such that you express it.
(2) There is a short example such that I request that you express it.

I think (1) is the correct interpretation: the scope of the request
is broader than the scope of the existential quantifier. But {lo} always
has the sense of something-that-really-is. The contrast with English
comes usually as a result of the scope of negation, the command,
the opaque context, etc, which don't always follow in Lojban the same
pattern as in English. In this case of the imperative they do.

co'o mi'e xorxes