Re: quantifiers on sumti - late response

[jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU]

la kris cusku di'e
> Given the way we use masses, quantifiers greater than one don't seem to mean
> much -- "re lei prenu" is apparently one of those cases where it's
> grammatical but doesn't mean much.  Would it be appropriate then to define
> "[Quant > 1] [mass]" to be shorthand for "[Quant > 1] lu'a [mass]" so that
> "re do" means "re lu'a do" (two of you) and "repa lei respa" means "repa
> lu'a lei respa" (21 of the in-mind mass of reptiles)?  The form is probably
> going to be used, and the meaning is quite understandable.

Probably it can be understood that way in those cases, but it could
cause confusion.  For example {re le gunma} means "two of the masses",
which is different from {re lu'a le gunma}, "two components of the
mass".  In the case of {lei}, {loi}, {do}, etc there is a single mass,
and so a quantifier greater than one doesn't make sense and can probably
be understood to mean the components, but when the sumti refers to more
than one mass, there could be trouble.

Jorge