From jjllambias@hotmail.com Thu Nov 07 08:02:59 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 7 Nov 2002 16:02:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 25580 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2002 16:02:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 7 Nov 2002 16:02:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.249) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Nov 2002 16:02:59 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 08:02:58 -0800 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Thu, 07 Nov 2002 16:02:58 GMT To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: importing ro Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 16:02:58 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Nov 2002 16:02:58.0971 (UTC) FILETIME=[24664EB0:01C28677] From: "Jorge Llambias" X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=6071566 X-Yahoo-Profile: jjllambias2000 la pycyn cusku di'e >1. There are four fundamental quantifiers in Lojban: {ro, su'o, no, >me'i[ro]} (I intend to make sure that the default origin for {me'i} is >{ro}, >if it is not already). That would be a good default. If I remember correctly though, CLL gives {pa} as a blanket default for every PA that neeeds one. A slightly more systematic form for the quantifiers would be {ro, no, za'u[no], me'i[ro]}. However, {za'u[pa]} is useful as a plural marker, and we are all too used to {su'o} to be worth the change. Another systematic series would be {ro, no, su'o[pa], su'e[da'apa]}. >2. They are related as follows >subalterns: ro => su'o > no => me'i >contraries: ro => naku no (and so, if you can't do the numbers, no => naku >ro) >subcontraries: naku su'o => me'i (and so naku me'i => su'o) >contradictories: naku ro <=> me'i > naku su'o <=> no > (and so naku no <=> su'o > naku me'i <=> ro) >When there is a guarantee that the subject term is non-empty, > no => ro naku > me'i => su'o naku Yes, that's all clear. You are using the set (A+E-I+O-) for the forms {Q broda cu brode}. I prefer (A-E-I+O+) for those forms, which give the rules: ro <=> no naku <=> naku su'o naku <=> naku me'i and, when there is a guarantee that the subject term is non-empty, ro => su'o no => me'i mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail