[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Re: {le} in xorlo

Jorge Llambías, On 23/04/2010 23:31:

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 3:44 PM, And Rosta <and.rosta@gmail.com> wrote:

Jorge Llambías, On 23/04/2010 02:07:

We would also have: "LE relative-clause KU" (as well as the more
obvious "LE KU relative-clause")

Do they mean the same thing? I remember we discussed it once, many years
ago, but can't remember the answer.


Without a quantifier, I don't see a difference. With a quantifier, the
inner clause should be clearly part of the sumti, and so it should
work in the same way as without a quantifier.

The outer clause with a quantifier involved is tricky. It could be
taken as restricting the referents of the sumti, or as restricting the
quantifier. If the latter, then each value of the bound variable must
pass through the restrictive clause filter individually. I don't know
whether it's worth making it restrict the quantifier. One problem is
that in "ko'a poi broda" we don't really have the two choices.

    no lo ze prenu (ku) poi pendo mi cu klama lo fasygu'e
    "None of the seven people who are my friends went to France."

Am I saying that of the seven people who are my friends, none of them
went to France, or that of the seven people, no friend of mine went to
France? Without "ku", it's clearly the first, but what happens with
"ku"?


Unsurprisingly, my intuitive reading of the ku poi version is the second one.

Is the lack of two choices for ko'a poi due to syntactic reasons? It shouldn't be for semantic reasons. If "ko'a" is equivalent to "lo me ko'a", as I think it should be, then there's the same contrast with "no lo ze me ko'a (ku) poi pendo mi cu klama lo fasygu'e" and hence "no ko'a (ku) poi pendo mi cu klama lo fasygu'e".

Changing the subject, slightly: one of the things about your putative equivalence between lo ku and zo'e that makes me uncomfortable is that zo'e should arguably include zi'o, but lo ku certainly shouldn't. But that's an issue less to do with logical language than with a specific Lojban bugfix (i.e. introduction of zi'o to compensate for bad gismu place structures and perhaps to render usage less erroneous (if empty sumti places can be filled with zi'o)).

--And.

--
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.