From araizen@newmail.net Sun Jun 03 02:16:55 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: araizen@newmail.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 3 Jun 2001 09:16:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 77930 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2001 09:16:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 3 Jun 2001 09:16:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mr.egroups.com) (10.1.1.37) by mta1 with SMTP; 3 Jun 2001 09:16:54 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: araizen@newmail.net Received: from [10.1.2.56] by mr.egroups.com with NNFMP; 03 Jun 2001 09:16:54 -0000 Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2001 09:16:54 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: quantifiers Message-ID: <9fcva6+9l0v@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1203 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 172.153.77.116 From: "Adam Raizen" la pycyn cusku di'e > use "rosu'o"/"su'oro", parallel to "roci", etc. for "all three". (Is > there any convention for which number goes first in these compound > quantifiers?)> > > I like the idea, but I wonder if it will work. {roci broda} comes in stages > from {ro lo ci lo broda} as far as I can remember (and this explains the > order); I think that (ro lo su'o lo broda} collapses to {lo broda} I'm not sure how to interpret "ro lo ci lo broda", is "ci" an inner or an outer quantifier? I thought that the compound quantifiers such as "roci", "so'upa", etc. claim that both quantifiers apply to the actual number ("so'uci le gerku" can't be expanded like that, I don't think.) "su'oro broda" could be interpreted as "at least all broda" which is the same as just "ro broda" and doesn't imply that there's at least one broda, so I guess that "rosu'o broda" is better. Another possibility might be "ro lo su'o broda", since the inner quantifier then specifies that the number of broda in the world is at least one. Also, we can connect operands with eks, so there's "vei ro e su'o broda". mu'o mi'e adam