Re: quantifiers on sumti - late response

[John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>]

la xorxes. cusku di'e
> > So what does this mean:
> >         so'a da poi gerku cu se denci ije so'i da batci da
> >         Almost all dogs have teeth, and most of those bite (themselves?/
> >         those that bite?/those with teeth?)
> >
> > To me it means "themselves", which doesn't agree with your rule (nor with
> > what you say it doesn't mean). I think the last {da} doesn't have a
> > quantifier. If you put one there it changes the meaning.

la .i,n. cusku di'e
> I think it has to mean the same as {so'i da zo'u: da batci da} -
> many of those bite themselves.  The following bridi would revert
> to {da} = the one's with teeth.

I don't agree.  I believe that Jorge's example does indeed mean "most of
those bite the ones with teeth", since "da" is not rebound.  Iain's
version, OTOH, means something quite different:  "most things bite
themselves".  When "da" explicitly appears in a new prenex, that
clobbers the old interpretation altogether, so all connection to dogs is
lost.

Essentially the rule as I have stated it gives meaning to the case in
which an already-bound variable is explicitly quantified at the point of
use.  It is not intended as a general-purpose narrowing mechanism.
--
John Cowan                                              cowan@ccil.org
                        e'osai ko sarji la lojban.