From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Tue Aug 14 18:33:29 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 15 Aug 2001 01:33:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 52149 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 01:33:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 15 Aug 2001 01:33:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO relay3-gui.server.ntli.net) (194.168.4.200) by mta2 with SMTP; 15 Aug 2001 01:33:27 -0000 Received: from m56-mp1-cvx2c.bre.ntl.com ([62.253.88.56] helo=andrew) by relay3-gui.server.ntli.net with smtp (Exim 3.03 #2) id 15WpJH-0007Px-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 02:17:28 +0100 To: Subject: goi & ku (was: RE: partial-bridi anaphora (was: RE: [lojban] no'a Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 02:32:32 +0100 Message-ID: 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: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal From: "And Rosta" Xorxes: > la and cusku di'e > > >So a bare ko'a refers to each member of the set separately, while > >a quantified ko'a requantifies over the set. > > > >Hmm. I can see the parallel with {da}, and I can see how this allows > >us to say the things we need to say, but I'm uncomfortable with > >the way the referent of ko'a shifts between members to set, depending > >on whether it's requantified. > > ko'a never refers to the set. (Neither does da refer to the set to > which it is restricted.) It would work like this: > > le ci ninmu ku goi ko'a cu viska ko'a > Each of the three women sees herself. > > le ci ninmu ku goi ko'a cu viska ro ko'a > Each of the three women sees each of the three women. OK. This is coherent. (I was getting confused because my loglan does it differently.) Some neat results ensue. {re le vo broda goi ko'a ku goi ko'e} means there's 4 ko'a and 2 ko'e, which is fairly obvious, but the neat thing is that {lo broda brode (be ... be'o) goi ko'a} therefore assigns ko'a to every broda brode (be ... be'o). We thus have assginable bridi anaphora of sorts, the equivalent of English anaphoric ONE and SO. Maybe this is well-known, but I certainly hadn't been aware of it. la djan ponse lo citno karce goi ko'a i mi ponse su'o ko'a poi xunre "John has a new car. I have a red one [=a red new car]." --And.