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

[lojban] Re: {zo'e}



Corbin Simpson <mostawesomedude@gmail.com> writes:

> You've buried the lede somewhat. There probably *aren't* context-free 
> formal definitions possible for {zo'e}, because speakers usually intend 
> either the semantics of {zi'o} (pretend that the place doesn't exist) or 
> {su'o da} (something fills the place but it is irrelevant; it does 
> logically exist, though!) The former is fulfilled when zero or more objects 
> match, but the latter requires at least one object to match.
>
> As a basic example, in the utterance {mi vecnu zo'e}, am I asserting that 
> at least one sale takes place? (Ignoring temporal issues.)

I think just about all of that is wrong.  {zo'e} can never mean {zi'o}
but {zo'e} can, in certain contexts, mean {noda}.  If you and I are in a
brightly-lit room when the power goes out and it's suddenly plunged into
pitch-black darkness, I might reasonably utter the observative:

  viska

meaning, in that context, "I can't see anything!", {mi viska noda}.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/86wnwwcl2t.fsf%40cmarib.ramside.