WikiDiscuss

WikiDiscuss


Robin's gadri Proposal

posts: 2388

Going to plurality does not mean getting away from quantifiers, except occasionally in the collective (non-distributive) case. You may not care what exactly the quantifier is, but that just is {su'o} so always there. Clearly something different is implicit in your xorlo example, since it is robin's case. I think that the problem is that leaving out the quantifier means to you that you can stick in whatever one strikes your fancy. That is more or less true, but some choices are higher probability, pragmatically, and so are defaults for all practical purpose. If you know better, you should say more (communication cooperation).

wikidiscuss@lojban.org wrote:Re: Robin's gadri Proposal

> Personal Specificity — sa'e
> The specific thing(s) I have in mind (i.e. "le", but without implication
> of veridicality).

I insist that {le} has no implication of veridicality, so the comment
'"le", but without implication of veridicality' does not make sense.

> le broda ~= lo sa'e broda == su'o da poi mi pensi ke'a zi'e
> poi ke'a broda

"~=" here means approximately equal, right? (Sometimes "~" is
used for negation.) Does this mean that you are dropping CLL's
default {[ro] le}?

Consider:

le prenu cu klama le zarci

CLL: Each of the people I have in mind goes to each of the
markets I have in mind.
RGP: At least one of the people I have in mind goes to at
least one of the markets I have in mind.
XS: The people I have in mind go to the markets I have in mind.

I believe XS is closest to usage, and CLL is the canonical
prescription, but your version is neither.

mu'o mi'e xorxes