Re: [lojban] {le} in xorlo

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:23 AM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:
> WTF? 'su'o' is not a quantifier, only a cardinal?

In "su'o lo su'o broda cu brode", the first "su'o" is a logical
quantifier, the bridi operator: '(Ex ...) ... ', the second one is
just a cardinality, the number of referents of the sumti "lo broda".
So I can't say what "su'o" is in itself, only what it is used as in a
given syntactic context. The same words that are used as logical
quantifiers in Lojban are also used as cardinals.

> Okay, so we need a (rarely used) plural universal quantifier.  Do we need an explicitly singular -- or plural -- particular quantifier? Not so obviously; I can't think off hand of a case where singularity or plurality was so important but not explicitly stated.

I agree that taking "su'o" as a plural quantifier would not be all
that harmful. Nowhere near as harmful as taking "ro" to be the plural
universal quantifier, anyway.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.