Re: [lojban] vliju'a

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

la kir cusku di'e

> I was always confused with the very meaning of {lo'e}. Does it mean the
> same as {so'a lo} or maybe {so'e lo} or even {rau lo}? If not, why?

No, it's none of those, lo'e is about the archetype. If you want
a quantifier it will have to be {tu'o lo}. We might say that lo'e
extracts the purely intensive properties of the members of the set.
No extensive examination of them (what quantifiers do) helps.

> > Or we can simplify it to: {lo'e djuno cu vlipa}.
>
> Very fine! Short, precise, lojbanic. Or just {lo djuno cu vlipa},
> regarding my doubts with {lo'e}.

If you have doubts about lo'e (which is most reasonable of you),
then {ro djuno cu vlipa} is, I think, better. {lo djuno cu vlipa}
only says that some knower is powerful, hardly comparable to the
claim that knowledge is power.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp