Subject: Re: lo'e (was: Re: [lojban] ce'u

From: "Jorge Llambias" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 22:53:49

la and cusku di'e

>Clearly (?) if lo'e gerku actually means "the typical", i.e. "lo fadni be
>tu'o ka gerku", then it won't do what you want it to. And anyway,
>it'd be annoying to have 2 gadri for le/lo fadni.

Indeed. It's more like "the archetype". The default quantifier
of {lo'e} should be {tu'o}.

>Now, you tell me that lo'e gerku is the intension. To me, then, that
>would be "tu'o ka ce'u zo'e gerku" or "tu'o ka ce'u ce'u gerku".

Wow, I think I'm having an epiphany. It's definitely not the latter,
because {lo'e gerku} clearly selects the x1 of gerku. But the former,
yes, I think I'm starting to like it. Let's see how it would work:

ta mutce le ka barda = ta mutce lo'e barda
That is much in bigness, that is much as a big thing.

ti ta frica le ka ce'u viska makau = ti ta frica lo'e viska be makau
This and that differ in what they see, this and that differ as seers
of whatever they see.

Yes, it seems to work. This has a very interesting consequence: I don't
need to keep carping on about the place structure of {sisku}.

mi sisku lo'e tanxe = mi sisku le ka ce'u tanxe
I look for a box, I look for that which has the property of
being a box.

Of course, it is still weird that {sisku} is singled out the
way it is in the wording of the definition, but now we can treat
all such predicates the same way:

mi nitcu lo'e tanxe = mi nitcu le ka ce'u tanxe

mi cpedu lo'e tanxe = mi cpedu le ka ce'u tanxe

mi djica lo'e tanxe = mi djica le ka ce'u tanxe

And of course we can use these predicates in the normal way
with non-opaque references:

mi nitcu le mi karce
mi cpedu ta

>I don't see how {tu'o ka ce'u nu} is going to solve
>the erroneous {le nu}s,

At least some of them:

mi nitcu lo'e nu do ti mi dunda
mi djica lo'e nu mi klama

mu'o mi'e xorxes

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp