Re: tremau

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

> >So what is the difference, and can you come up with an example where
>>the value of ni broda is different for these two definitions (or maybe
>>you have and I don't understand).
>
>Well, the x3 of zmadu can't take a number, so any example that
>uses ni there would correspond to the second definition.

I think I will accept this and say I was wrong before, now that we seem to
be using the same meaning of "number" %^).

>All right, then you do see what I mean. You're saying that ni has the
>abstract meaning, not the unraised quantifier meaning.

I think the place structure of klani, which ought to be somewhat defining
of ni as ckaji is of ka and fasnu of nu and lifri of li'i ... should govern
in the event of uncertainty.

> >>In most cases ni is used in its raised meaning. Very rarely,
>>>as in the refgram's 1-B example, is it used as a number.
>>
>>I'm not sure which is 1-B - i'm using the real book %^)  Presuming that
>this
>>is the "amount of blue" subtraction example, it is confusing because of
>>the use of mo'e, which is anything but clearly defined -
>
>It sounds like a cop out, but I guess since nobody knows how mo'e works
> you can get away with it.

I'll agree that it is a copout.  After all the Book cannot be wrong %^).
It may be vague, and I'd even concede that there may be an E-trans that is
inaccurate because of the weakness of our undertsanding of English and
its fuzzy semantics.  The Lojban of course NEVER has an unrecognized
sumti raising - it is merely that the English doesn't quite mean what we
thought it meant $%)>It sounds like a cop out, but I guess since nobody knows
 how mo'e works
> you can get away with it. Then we all agree that something like:
>
>            *le ni la djan cu ricfu cu du li piso'i
>
>is nonsense? (The correct way to express what would be meant by
>that is {la djan cu ricfu sela'u li piso'i}.)

Actually, I thoink the correct way is to replace "du" by "klani".

I ALWQAYS assume that any usage of "du" is wrong at this point, and reflects
someone not quite understandings omething %^) We shouldn't need du except in
Mex and the implicit po'u/no'u circumstances.

lojbab
----
lojbab                                                lojbab@access.digex.net
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA                        703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: ftp.access.digex.net /pub/access/lojbab
    or see Lojban WWW Server: href="http://xiron.pc.helsinki.fi/lojban/";
    Order _The Complete Lojban Language_ - see our Web pages or ask me.