WikiDiscuss

pc:
> Well, then {lo broda cu brode} means exactly the same thing as {su'o broda cu
> brode} — contrary to what you have often said — and I don't see what all
> the fuss was about.

We must be speaking different languages. I say that {lo broda cu brode}
makes no claim about instances, and from that you conclude that it's
exactly the same thing as making the claim about at least one instance.
{su'o da poi broda} is just not interreplaceable with {zo'e noi broda}.
One claim is much more precise than the other. Sometimes we want such
extra precision, sometimes we don't.

> Intersection is an attempt to make sense of your
> repeated claim that {lo broda cu brode} amd a general claim that {su'o broda
> cu brode} did not.

It can be used to make a more general claim, yes, in the right context.
{zo'e} is very context-sensitive. It does not always make a general claim.
If you present a sentence out of the blue with no context, the general
claim tends to be the first that comes to mind, that's all.

> If you no longer hold that view (which has beena peculiar
> one from the get-go), then we pretty much agree on everything and I can drop
> all of this except the renewed suggetion that , since you don't need it, you
> get rid of Mr. Broda.

I have no particular attachment to Mr Broda. He is not mentioned
in the proposed definitions.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail