Re: [lojban] non-clausal ke'a

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 4:00 PM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I was going to note that, in the expanded form, though not the original, another
> approach would be just to extent the scope of the 'da'. but again, the 'no' case
> rather cuts into that, and, indeed, reference back to a no case seems always to
> be peculiar -- or to point to the more general suggestion you make, which seems
> to cover all the possibilities (until we consider other quantifiers with
> overlapping scopes).

When overlapping quantifiers are involved, the simple rule of picking
just the sumti also makes the most sense:

   ro lo prenu cu citka su'o lo plise .i ri kukte
   "Everyone ate at least one of the apples. They were delicious."

If "ri" just points to "lo plise", there's not much of a problem.

The alternative here is that it points to "lo ro lo plise poi se citka
su'o lo prenu", but to get to that you have to apply some major
transformations to the sentence as given. For each combination of
quantifiers you would need to come up with a specific rule.

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.