Re: [lojban] {zo'e} as close-scope existentially quantified plural variable

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
>
> Well, liking dogs is quite different from liking Fido, and also
> different from liking almost all dogs, and from there being a high
> probability that you would (come to) like a randomly chosen dog you were
> presented with, and from anything else which reduces to talking about
> individual dogs. I do think that it would be reasonable to use {nelci}
> for this concept, but that it should be expressed by {nelci lo ka gerku}
> rather than {nelci lo gerku}.

The drawback of that approach is that you cannot combine predications
that "resolve" differently. You can't say for example "I like lions,
but they are destroying my garden", not as "mi nelci lo ka cinfo .i
ku'i ri daspo lo mi purdi" anyway, because presumably you don't mean
to say that a property is destroying your garden.

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.