Re: subordinate interrogatives

[And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>]

Xorxes:
> Excellent! Excelentisimo!

[I've no comment to make on that. I'm just leaving it there out of
pride at earning Jorge's praise!]

> Let's see now, we can also do {mokau}:
>
>         ko'a djuno ku'au mi mo kau
>         she  knows that  I  Qu N.I.F.
>         "She knows what I am."
>
> Which expands to:
>
>         ro bu'a zo'u ge da jei zei jei gi ko'a djuno ku'au
>         da jei mi bu'a
>         "For every F(), there is something that is a truth value and
>         that she thinks is the truth value of the proposition F(mi)."

Right.

> But I can't do {xokau}, because there is no bindable quantifier variable:
>
>         ko'a djuno ku'au mi citka xo kau    plise
>         she  knows that  I  eat   Qu N.I.F. apples
>         "She knows how many apples I eat."
>
>         "For every q, there is something that is a truth value and
>         that she thinks is the truth value of the proposition that
>         I eat q apples."
>
> How do we say that in Lojban?

"For every x, there is something that is a truth value and
that she thinks is the truth-value of the proposition that
x is cardinality of the set y such that every z is a member
of y if and only if z is apple and I eat z"

{....kuau da cardinality loi ge plise gi citka be fa mi}

(where {loi} is my new way of spelling everyone else's {lo'i}/{lohi}).

I don't have any reference materials at hand to find suitable
selbri valsi for "cardinality".

i coo mie And