On Sunday, November 11, 2012 4:50:40 AM UTC+4, xorxes wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 9:29 PM, selpa'i <sel...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> I think you can attach the "qua" tag with a {be} or {pe} to attach it to one
> of the arguments.
If you are happy with "pe" for that, then you don't need anything else:
xu zo menli poi cmene cu melbi do
"poi" would be used to restrict to a particular aspect or capacity of
an individual rather than to some particular individual(s) from a set.
(That sort of matches the etymology of "qua" too.)
Of course one can create any experimental cmavo. And we could imagine a {vo'o'oi} (selmaho NOI) that would distribute over properties of the same object rather than individuals.
But it's all philosophy (see the thread on object vs. properties vs. process languages).
But in this case we should solve the same problem for conjunctions.
What is {xekri je mlatu}? One black cat or two objects, one black and another one being a cat?
mu'o mi'e xorxes
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.