Re: [lojban] Re: Three more issues

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

la aulun cusku di'e

> If that is true then the following seems to be tautological/nonsensical:
> {lo} -> {su'o lo ro} -> at least one of *each* (one)  or  {re} -> {re lo 
> ro} -> two of *each* (one)

You're right, translating inner {ro} as "each" does not
work well, but the "inner quantifier" is not a quantifier,
it is the cardinality of the set. {ro} doesn't add anything
really, the inner quantifier is always the total number,
you use {ro} when you don't want to be more specific.

Another use of {ro} that does not translate well as "each"
is for ordinals: romoi, rore'u, romai where it means "last".

In any case, {ro broda}, {ro lo broda} or {ro da poi broda}
always means "each broda".

co'o mi'e xorxes

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.