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

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

Jorge Llambías, On 05/11/2011 01:51:

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Martin Bays<mbays@sdf.org>  wrote:

    (B) {su'o ransedyta'u cu se dasni ro faspre},



If xorxes says (B) - or {ro faspre cu dasni lo ransedyta'u}, which
appears to be approximately equivalent


The whole point of xorlo was to get away from the idea that "lo
ransedyta'u" was equivalent to "su'o ransedyta'u".


They're different because su'o is scope-sensitive and lo isn't, but I see no difference between {PA ransedyta'u cu se dasni ro faspre} and {ro faspre cu dasni lo PA ransedyta'u} (where PA is {pa} in each or {su'o} in each). Of course, if you stuck {na ku} in front, they'd become nonequivalent again, because that would trigger the scope-sensitivity of PA.

--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.