From jjllambias@hotmail.com Tue Mar 12 15:00:38 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: unknown); 12 Mar 2002 23:00:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 37688 invoked from network); 12 Mar 2002 22:59:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 12 Mar 2002 22:59:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.94) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Mar 2002 22:59:54 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 14:59:54 -0800 Received: from 200.69.2.52 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Tue, 12 Mar 2002 22:59:54 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] More about quantifiers Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 22:59:54 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Mar 2002 22:59:54.0533 (UTC) FILETIME=[9FB22550:01C1CA19] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.69.2.52] X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la pycyn cusku di'e >I suspect that there is no simple word for it because it is so rarely >useful >as opposed to {su'o...naku...} and, when it is, "not every" works fine. "Not some" should work just as well for "no", and yet it gets its own word in English (as well as in Lojban, coincidentally). ... >This shows that either system is going to have to spend some >time on multiple quantifier cases, since this kind of recalculation just >won't work in real time. It works in English, at least to some extent. It's not so hard to see that "someone loves someone" means the same as "not everyone loves no one", or that "everyone loves everyone" means the same as "no one loves less than everyone". The problem here is that English doesn't like "not everyone" in object position, but fluent Lojban speakers in theory should not have a problem with {me'iro da} there. >There seems to be problems all over the place with >second -- and probably later -- quantifiers. Not with the quantifiers, only with their import, which is most often irrelevant anyway. >As patterns emerge, it should >no doubt be possible to get some pretty tight rules on this. Here's the rule: if there's an odd number of negatives in front (that's explicit naku's plus the implicit ones inside of {no} and {me'iro}) then the import is reversed. >Why does Aristotle's system not have {no broda naku} = {ro broda}? Don't ask me! He has {ro broda} with import and {no broda} with no import, according to what you reported. Wasn't his system (A+,E-,I+,O-)? mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx