WikiDiscuss

pc:
> I would read {me
> lo'i broda} as "one broda," that is "one member
> of the set of broda," taking it to be the analog
> for sets of "among" for plurals (that is
> strictly, of course, inclusion, not membership
> but at least for singulars the difference is
> systematically ignored).

OK, but that's not how I'm reading it.

I read {me sumti} as "x1 is/are among the referents of
sumti" in all cases, even when the referent of sumti
is a set.

> Otherwise, {me lo'i
> broda} reduces to {lo'i broda} and the
> definitions that follow that form become circular
> and the whole expression useless.

{me lo'i broda} is a brivla, so it can't reduce to {lo'i broda}.
I'm not sure which definitions you consider that become
circular.

> > ro le mu broda = ro da poi ke'a me le mu
> > broda
>
> And what does that mean now that meanings are
> shifting all over the place? If — as appears to
> be the case — it means all the things that are
> groups of five specific brodas,

No, that's not what it means. It means "each of the things
that are a referent of {le mu broda}, i.e. each of the
five brodas. There are no groups involved here.

> My choice would be, as you know, to use
> plural definitions and use {loi} for collective
> predications, {lo} for distributive and {lo'i}
> for permanent collectives, but that is a proposal
> to be debated separately, not assumed in
> discussions of what proposal to use.

Yes, I understand that.

> As for doing
> something other than reified thigns for {loi} and
> {lo'i}; what choices do we have?

Those are the two basic choices, I think.

> > > In English, which is more subject to
> > > these tricks than some, I could make a case
> > for
> > > "a half from the four apples" but not a tight
> > > case. What does Spanish offer along this
> > line --
> > > or any other natural language (not of course
> > a
> > > proof, but evidence surely)?
> >
> > "Media de las cuatro manzanas", as opposed to
> > "la mitad
> > de las cuatro manzanas". The latter is
> > ambiguous
> > between two apples and four half-apples, just
> > as
> > "half of the four apples" in English.
> >
> I took the first to be unambiguously in favoe of
> two apples — correct?

No. "Media de las cuatro manzanas" is unambiguously "half
(an apple) out of the four apples". "La mitad de las cuatro
manzanas" is ambiguous between two other meanings, the same
ones of "half of the four apples": i.e. two apples or
four half-apples.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail