Re: Quantifiers

[Chris Bogart <cbogart@CSN.NET>]

>la kris cusku di'e
> > I think "ci [lo] nanmu cu nenri le kumfa" does what you want.  Check out the> > definition of "ci" carefully.

tu'a la dil,n:
>(You imply that there is a definition of {ci} somewhere.  Is there?
>As far as I can tell, the best discussion is in the mex and sumti papers.)

I think you're right, but *somewhere* I read a discussion of numbers
that emphasized that "su'ore" means "plural" and "re" means exactly two.
In fact that's the only way I can remember "su'o":  the first part of
"su'ore" which means plural (funny how the mind works)

> > In English "three men are in the room"
> > doesn't necessarily rule out that there are other men there too.  [...]
>
>Yes, that seems right now.  (Although I see I've tricked you, too,
>into believing {nanmu} means "men" rather than "women".)  (And see
>below.)

You didn't trick me, you tricked yourself somehow!  Nanmu *does* mean men! :-)

> > >        lo ci nanmu pe ne'i le kumfa cu ce'o
> >     One or more of the three men which are in the room, do something
> >         [...Only the main bridi is claimed]
>
>Well, it's an incidental claim, yes?
>It would be confusing, in any case.

But what's the central claim and what's the incidental claim seems like an
important element of the meaning.

> > >        .i le ni lo nanmu cu nenri le kumfa cu du ci
> >     The quantity of "the men are in the room" is three
> >         [I think you need to quantify the men, not the whole
> >           statement of their being in a room.  "ni" has fairly
> >           limited usage, pe'i]
>
>Yes,
>       le ni nanmu ne'i le kumfa cu du ci
>would be required.

I still don't like it -- I'm not sure how to use "ni" because in any
abstraction there are an infinity of possible things that could be
quantified.  You're assuming that "ni" is counting the number of items
which fill the x1 place -- which sounds like a good rule of thumb to me
but I haven't seen it written down anywhere.

> >         ro nanmu pe ne'i le kumfa cu se klani li ci
>
>Don't think these work: "Each of the women in the room quantifies 3."

You're right about my misuse of ro.  And once again I'm using an old
version of the gismu list to get an old definition of klani.

>       piro loi nanmu pe ne'i le kumfa cu klani li ci
>
>would do it.

>This has some slightly odd consequences, though I'm not sure how to
>work them with the grammar.  But I believe
>
>       pa lu'a le xunre cukta .e le blabi cukta .e le blanu cukta
>               cu cpana le jubme
>
>means
>       Exactly one of the red book, the white book, and the blue book
>               is on the table
>
>Yes?

I think you need 'ce' instead of '.e'; otherwise it's decomposeable into
three sentences.
                     ____
 Chris Bogart        \  /  ftp://ftp.csn.net/cbogart/html/homepage.html
 Quetzal Consulting   \/   cbogart@quetzal.com



Message  8: