only - more choices

[Logical Language Group <cbmvax!uunet!GREBYN.COM!cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu!lojbab>]

After much talking about formulations for only, I'll throw in another
possibility - which crosses Nick's solution with Bruce Gilson's; the
specific idea was suggested by Mark Shoulson's posting.

I have argued, and I think John Cowan has accepted, that the combination
of ro+number can be defined to have meaning.  For example "rore prenu"
means "all-two persons" or "both persons".  If this is so, could not
"ropa" mean "only one"?  Any other plausible interpetations.

If "ropa" could mean "only" then "ropamei" is a predicate meaning
x1 is an/the only-onesome of x2

This covers many uses of "only", but may not cover all of them.  I'm
not sure that any/all of the various formulations cover plural values
for the "only" 'subject'.  Some problem cases to check:

The two persons were the only ones present (zvati)
John and Mary were the only ones present  (which version of 'and' fits here?)

And how would you refine the Allah statement if you wished to explicitly
claim that Allah is singular?  that Allah is plural!?

(you can perhaps cheat with a compound predicate for the latter
e.g. su'oremei gi'e romei  pluralsome-and-allsome

lojbab