a much delayed response to Veijo

[Logical Language Group <cbmvax!uunet!GREBYN.COM!lojbab>]

Veijo responds to me on Colin (6 weeks ago - my mail backup due to JL is
    AWESOME):
>>>lo cukta noi mi nelci ke'a
>>>(at least one of the things in the universe which actually [is-a-book
>>>incidentally I like it]
>>
>>At least one of the things in the universe which actually [are-a-
>>book], of which I incidentally add that I like it/them.
>>
>>A/some books, which I like, ...
>>
>>It seems from the ENGLISH that an incidental clause on a lo/loi/lo'i
>>must apply to all (i.e. the internal quantifier after the
>>descriptor), since otherwise the speaker has a particular one in
>>mind, and the clause would restrict.  But there may be a mind-twist
>>situation - some case that we just can't understand in English
>>distinctly, where an incidental clause applies only to the selected
>>individuals.  My logic isn't up to analyzing this possibility,
>>though.
>
>If I understand the above correctly the 'all' refers to all the things
>which actually [are-a-book] and the 'selected individuals' to 'a/some
>books'.  If that is the case, I can, however, think of a rather
>commonplace situation in English (slightly elaborated from the above)
>where the incidental clause could apply only to the selected
>individuals:
>
>  'Here you have some German books,  which I, by the way,
>   happen to like a lot.'
>
>I can also think of another level of incidentality:
>
>  'The/some books(,) of which some have the property that
>  I like them'
>
>  'The/some books(,) of which some may have the property
>  that I like them'
>
>The first one is(?) a basic type which ought to be expressable with a
>simple structure "le/lo cukta ??? mi nelci ke'a".  Here it is not a
>question of incidental information but of 'incidental' predication.  The
>same kind of situation arises when we are equating things.  When I was
>doing my premature attempt to translate the haiku by Shadoo, I was
>searching for a way to express this predication level incidentality:
>'various names, though some of them may equate with the things which
>really are difficult, do really equate with the weeds of spring'.
>
>The second one (and others like it with varying degrees of certainty
>etc.) could be a modification.

The first doesn't seem all that different from the original.  Use discursives
in selma'o UI:

le/lo cukta noi mi ta'o mutce nelci

ta'o discursively means 'by the way' for a point that is off-the-subject,
    which is a particular kind of incidental information
You could also use te'i 'in particular' to indicate that you in
    particular like the book, which seems to me to weaken the implication
    that others might like it.

The second uses explicit quantification inside the clause:

le/lo cukta noi su'oke'a se nelci mi
Books, of which some-of-them are liked by me,

The third example then uses an attitudinal, or if appropriate, a second level
of subordination:

le/lo cukta noi su'o .iacu'i ke'a se nelci mi
Books, of which some-(I have no particular-belief of this)-of-them are
  liked by me,

le/lo cukta noi cumki fa lenu mi nelci su'oke'a
Books, of which possible-it-is-that the-event I am-fond-of some-of-them
  (is true).

lojbab