--
Dear selmriste,
It seems that using xorlo prevents explicitly talking about indivduals, such as
/one elephant/, a seemingly simple concept. Let's start with an inner quantifier:
lo pa xanto = zo'e noi ke'a xanto gi'e zilkancu li pa lo xanto,
However, the latter {lo xanto} in zilkancu3 can denote about a group of
elephants, so {lo pa xanto} can indeed be many elephants. Outer quantifiers
will not help, as they will only range over the inner object.
Using zo'e directly is obviously fruitless since xorlo seems to influence how
both zo'e, and how noi work: together they remove our abilities to explicitly
talk about individuals. This make me assume that it also affects the
da-family, so {pa xanto} is also out of the question.
Finally, any brivla will not help us here as the dreaded lo-zo'e-noi-trinity
will always be able to sneak in a group where we want an individual. For
instance in {lo pa kantu be lo pa xanto}, or {lo xantyka'u}, we still might end
up with a onesome of elephants.
Why was it decided to make it like this? It seems that a monolingual jbopre
would not /really/ be able to differentiate an elephant from its flock.
(But perhaps not if we were talking about sheep, but I digress)
Hopefully I have misunderstood everything. If this is so, please enlighten me.
ki'e mi'e la danr
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.