Re: [lojban] More about quantifiers

[And Rosta <arosta@uclan.ac.uk>]

Jorge:
#>              exchange {Q da poi broda} and {Q broda}
#
#The "exchange {Q da poi broda} and {Q broda}" bit is the ugly
#step for me. When {broda} is a complex bridi, this may mean
#adding lots of be-bei's and possibly having to do internal
#rearrangments if {ke'a} is not the first sumti. It sounds like
#a simple rule, but in practice it is not. It removes the
#freedom to use the {poi} form as a stylistic variant, which
#is all it is in my version.

The syntax of Lojban is such that every "lo" sumti can be 
translated into a "da poi ... ke'a" sumti, but not vice versa. 
(The main examples would be where ke'a is embedded 
within a subordinate bridi or sumti within the relative
clause.) 

Hence, any 'exchange' between the two must be one-way, from
"da poi ke'a" to "lo". 

Hence it makes sense to see "lo" as simply an abbreviation
of "da poi ke'a".

Further, if Jorge and pc want to propose comprehensive
systems for importing and nonimporting quantifiers, they
should be done solely on the basis of "da poi ke'a", since
only such a system will generalize to all cases. In this
respect, Jorge's and pc's proposals are equally defective.

--And