Re: [lojban] About plural 'ro'

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:48 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In addition, I note that the problem of  'ro lo broda cu brode'  bringing up a number of pluralities among lo broda which don't brode may result from a misinterpretation of  'ro lo broda' which ranges not over everything among lo broda but only those among them that broda.

Why would you want that? Surely the simple rule is that in "ro
<sumti>" a universal plural quantifier ranges over everything among
the referents of the sumti, not about a selection that depends on the
particular details of how the sumti was constructed.

> Thus, if 'broda' is, for example a predicate that applies directly only to individuals, then only individuals will be sorted out, not various other pluralities.  And conversely.  Every word,  as the saying goes, has its own logic and, presumably, this fact will be appropriately recorded in the logic of each.

The logic of "broda" will surely be relevant in identifying the
referents of "lo broda", but why should it be relevant in determining
whether "ro" is singular or plural? What happens if an assignable
variable is assigned the referents of "lo broda", does it thereafter
always carry with it the method by which its referents were collected?

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.