Subject: pa lo badna and the Goatleg Rule

From: Rob Speer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2001 15:46:31 -0500

On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 08:26:09PM -0000, And Rosta wrote:
> pc:
> > [email-masked] writes: 
> > 
> > . I call it the Goatleg Rule. "At least 1" is "su'o pa". 
> > "Pa" on its own is "exactly 1, and no more".
> > 
> > Why Goatleg rule? 
> 
> Because I first found out about it when John explained that 
> "ro -goat se tuple re da" is false (even restricting goats
> to those with 4 legs). To me this rule is a perennial Gotcha
> (that which catches one out when one isn't being careful).

This doesn't sound right. This may happen with {da}, but doesn't {pa lo}
mean "one of..." and allow that there may be others?

If you say {mi viska pa lo badna}, are you saying that that is the
only banana you see? The only banana you will ever see? How would you
fix this while still only focusing on one banana?
-- 
la rab.spir
noi viska no gumri