Re: [lojban] "Any" and {ro}

[tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com>]

On 17 August 2012 12:41, Paul Predkiewicz <paul.predkiewicz@gmail.com> wrote:
> but its definition says "an elliptical/unspecified value; has some value
> which makes bridi true" which would be a good description for "anything"
> aswell, or wouldn't it?

There can be a difference between "un/specified" and "un/specific".
One can have a physically specific but officially unspecified child,
for example. {zo'e} is to have an unspecified but not necessarily
unspecific value, it seems. Suppose there are an apple & an orange on
a table; you want to eat the apple; below would be a valid statement:

  mi djica lo nu citka zo'e

{zo'e} is referring to whatever citka2 that makes the bridi true,
which in this case is specifically the apple. If there were nothing on
the table but you nevertheless wanted to eat something, the same
statement would again be valid, except that {zo'e} would this time be
referring to unspecific objects.


mu'o

-- 
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.