Here is new definition:
- lo (LE)
- Generic article. It converts a selbri, selecting its first argument, into a sumti. The resulting _expression_ refers generically to any or some individual or individuals that fit as the first argument of the selbri. An inner quantifier can be used to indicate the number of individuals. An outer quantifier can be used to quantify distributively over such individuals.
- (Source: http://www.lojban.org/tiki/BPFK+Section%3A+gadri)
Where did you find the word "veridical"?
veridical descriptor: the one(s) that really is(are) ...
Under the xorlo reform, lo converts a selbri to a sumti in a rather generic way. In particular, lo broda = zo'e noi broda.
понедельник, 24 июня 2013 г., 3:02:39 UTC+6 пользователь aionys написал:On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Анатолий Гашев <volis...@gmail.com> wrote:Using here {le nanmu} is not better and actually it might be wrong. Cuz it may be that I just now saw a woman, which I described as a man and I think the person is a man.
He/she has not any specific meaning for me at all that is why I called him/her {lo nanmu}, but not {le ninmu}.
Please, everybody, read xorlo-update already cuz the {lo}-meaning has changed dramatically since CLL, which is dated by 1997.
Lookup the meaning of the word "veridical". {lo} is and /always has been/ veridical- it must and can only be used for things which /actually are/ what you're describing them as. {le} is and /always has been/ non-veridical.
xorlo did not change the meaning of {lo} or {le}, it just changed how quantification works.
воскресенье, 23 июня 2013 г., 18:18:40 UTC+6 пользователь v4hn написал:On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 03:21:50AM -0700, Анатолий Гашев wrote:
> I may call a woman with {lo nanmu} if I think the person is a man.
> You can ask about that almost anybody, especially la tsani or la selpa'i.
> And they can say am I right or not.
Yes, you can do that. Obviously. How else would you describe someone
who seems to be a man?
Nevertheless, you say something ba'e wrong then.
Using {le nanmu} (which in my opinion is better style anyway when you
have someone specific in mind) you do not, because you refer to
a specific individual no matter the description.
v4hn--To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+un...@googlegroups.com.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.
.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
--
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 post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.