Re: [lojban] Re: {da poi} (was: Re: tersmu 0.2

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:

* Sunday, 2014-09-28 at 21:17 -0300 - Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>:

> On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@sdf.org> wrote:
>
> Should we allow for the possibility that "brode" is not distributive over
> the brodas?
> Something like:
>
>    su'o da poi plini zi'e noi so'i so'i mei cu terdi

I think it's a reasonable rule that since {su'o} is a singular
quantifier, the implicit relative variable in the noi clause refers
to a singular variable. That would rule out this kind of thing.

My current thinking is that variables are not singular or plural, it's just the quantifiers that bind them that can be singular or plural, and singular and plural quantifiers can both have the same domain. 

The noi there is still weird, but in "PA da poi broda zi'e noi brode cu brodi", it should make no difference what PA is, since in all cases the domain of quantification would be the same, and the members of that implicit domain seem to be the only things available for the noi close to be about. Also, since it's always possible to force a distributive reading with "noi ro ke'a ...", I would not make it a part of "noi" itself.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
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/d/optout.