la latro'a cu cusku di'e
His point involves a definition of {da broda} as "there exists x in the
universe of discourse such that x broda". This does not require "There
exists x in the universe of discourse such that x broda gi'e zasti [fi
zu'i]", since we talk about things that don't exist all the time. Under
this definition, if you say {lo pavyseljirna}, there's a unicorn in the
universe of discourse, irrespective of whether it exists in reality.
"Reality" (which you described with zasti fi zu'i) doesn't matter, since we're talking in terms of UDs. lo pavyseljirna introduces unicorns into our UD, but it still doesn't claim that one *exists* in *this UD* (other UDs don't matter, nor does "reality"). This distinction seems important, and it matters a lot when we talk about xorlo too. So, I'm not sure this is exactly the point he makes. Some clarification would be useful.
mu'o mi'e la selpa'i
--
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.