[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] About plural 'ro'
The point is, of course, that 'ro' is plural, but filtered, by the very nature of the expression. To be sure, if we assign the members of lo broda to some 'ke'a' so that the method of their selection is lost, we may make a mistake and get the wrong results -- which is probably a good reason for not doing that or being very careful what you say after doing it.
The point is that 'lo broda' is designative not purely denotative, that is, it refers to a number of things, but only insofar as they broda (unlike 'ke'a', apparently, or even 'le broda'), so the designative aspect comes in and the quantifier can take out only what is there. Of course, if what is there can be plural, then it takes out all the plurals, but if it is individual, then it takes out only the individuals: All those who carried the piano were rewarded, subset of them (there are probably better cases but I can't think of any now).
----- Original Message ----
From: Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tue, April 20, 2010 2:58:17 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] About plural 'ro'
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.
--
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.