Re: `at least one ' vrs `one or more'

[Thanatos <thanatos@DIMENSIONAL.COM>]

>But the question revolves around the negation of
>
>    mi nelci lo mlatu
>
>where {lo mlatu} means `some number of real cats, but not necessarily
all'.
>
>The negation is translated as
>
>    "for some number of cats x, not necessarily everyone, it is not the
>    case that I like x."
>

Scope problems again.  I would translate the negation as:
     "It is not the case that, (for some number _of all_ real cats x,
not necessarily all, I like x)"

In other words, that {mi nelci lo mlatu} is false.

>This does not mean `I don't like any cats'!

With your, in my opinion incorrect, translation, no.  You've negated
{nelci} rather than the entire bridi.  "For some cats, I don't like
them."  Which is not the negation of "I like some cats."

If you did like some of all the cats, then {mi nelci lo mlatu} would be
true.

"The most important rule about bridi negation is that if a bridi is
true, its negation is false, and vice versa. (online refgram, chap 15)"

If there are any cats you like, then {mi nelci lo mlatu} is true, yes?

If {mi nelci lo mlatu} is false, then you must not like any cats.

lo : one-or-more-of-all-the-things-which-really are
"Of all" the cats.

{xu do nelci lo mlatu} "Yes or no, of all the things that really are
cats, do you like some, not necessarily all, of them?"

If, out of all the cats, you like any of them, then {mi nelci lo mlatu}
is true, yes?

If, out of all the cats, you can't find even one that you like, then {mi
nelci lo mlatu} is false, and therefore {mi na nelci lo mlatu} is
true.

{mi na nelci lo mlatu} is synonymous with your being unable to find, out
of all the cats, one or more that you like, i.e., you don't like any
cats.

If, in your model, you can say both:

{mi nelci lo mlatu} is true
  and
{mi na nelci lo mlatu} is true

then something is wrong.  They cannot both be true.

--
Erik W. Cornilsen
I apologize for any spelling mistakes.  My brain is incapable of keeping
speed with my fingers just yet.