Re: [lojban] Lions and levels and the like

[maikxlx <maikxlx@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 11:16 AM, John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The glorking can be made explicit in various ways.  I, of course, take the {lo
> danlu cu mabru} case as disjunctive predication, assuming that {lo danlu} is
> here one of those superbunches.  But this presents no problems (as do not the
> others either) if taken as local bunches: unknown animal being investigated,
> find drops of lactation in lair, so conclude above.
>
I am still not 100% sure how bunches work (I am still working through
that 400+ email thread on {zo'e} which prompted my email on
truth-conditional semantics).  But in the case of a specific kind of
unknown animal, say a duck-billed platypus, intuitively I would want
to say {le danlu cu mabru}.  That's how I have internalized Lojban,
whether that is currently right or wrong.

Off the top of my head, the only context in which I can imagine saying
something like {lo danlu cu mabru} is if I were trying to explain to
someone what a {danlu} is, e.g. {.i lo danlu cu mabru .i lo danlu cu
cinki .i lo danlu cu se klesi so'i lo jmive}

-- 
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.