From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Mon Jul 30 19:23:39 2001
Return-Path: <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 31 Jul 2001 02:23:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 38928 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2001 02:23:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 31 Jul 2001 02:23:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO relay3-gui.server.ntli.net) (194.168.4.200) by mta3 with SMTP; 31 Jul 2001 02:23:38 -0000
Received: from m27-mp1-cvx2c.bre.ntl.com ([62.253.88.27] helo=andrew) by relay3-gui.server.ntli.net with smtp (Exim 3.03 #2) id 15ROwr-0000QY-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 31 Jul 2001 03:07:54 +0100
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] RE:{goi} addendum
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 03:22:51 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMOEOFEHAA.a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <F227GSyMp69YDqSkcJs000085bb@hotmail.com>
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Importance: Normal
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>

Jorge:
> la pycyn cusku di'e
> 
> >The reason for the rule on double quantifiers that Lojban uses is almost
> >certainly the enormous difficulty within logic otherwise of saying 
> >something
> >like "Three men came into the saloon. Two of them well to the bar. One of
> >these ordered a lime rickey."
> 
> One way of saying this without getting into trouble is:
> 
> le ci nanmu cu nerkla le barja i le re le ci nanmu cu klama
> le barjyjbu i le pa le re le ci nanmu cu cpedu lo'e ladru

Or 
{le ci nanmu cu nerkla le barja 
i le re ra cu klama le barjyjbu 
i le pa ra cu cpedu lo'e ladru} 
or 
{le ci nanmu cu nerkla le barja 
i le re le go'i cu klama le barjyjbu 
i le pa le go'i cu cpedu lo'e ladru} 
?

IOW, pc's sentences seem dead easy to render simply.

--And.