Subject: Re: [lojban] A serious but ungeneralized new attempt on Q-kau [retractions]

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:21:31 EDT

Boy, I REALLY have to do this stuff at 3 am rather than 8pm!

In a message dated 9/6/2001 7:58:08 PM Central Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> No, for two reasons. First of all, you need "poi ge jetnu gi du'u
> da prami de" to be a restriction on da and on de, but it isn't. As
> it stands, you're claiming that ko'a knows that everything loves
> everything. IIRC, though, there is a way to get one relative clause to
> modify two conjoined sumti, but I can't remember offhand how to do it.
> 
> Second, and more seriously, it doesn't cover cases where da prami no de
> 
Both points are right ({poi} is not conditional with {su'o} as it sorta is 
with {ro}) and "nobody" can, of course, be an answer in other than 
presupposition fights. I am still not sure that it enters directly into this 
case, however, since it does not seem to be in the answers to "Who loves 
whom?" -- at least directly (we can infer from the absence of a name in one 
category or the other, I suppose). 

roda rode zo'u ganai da prami de gige di du'u da prami de gi la pol djuno di

I am not sure whether to patch for the "nobody" case