WikiDiscuss

---

> Jorge Llamb?as scripsit:
>
> > If we want to identify {pimu} with {pa fi'u re} as quantifiers, then
> > we must:
> >
> > 1) Drop CLL's interpretation of piPA's with masses and sets,
> > 2) Drop the idea that masses and sets are possible values of da,
> > 3) Drop the interpretation of {PA1fi'uPA2} as PA1 out of every PA2,
> > 4) Find some other definitions that are consistent with all of that.
>
> I choose 3; I see no reason why pa fi'u re should have special
> semantics.

Then we are left with no way of saying "PA1 out of every PA2".
(This is kind of an idiom in English, it does not literally mean
"for every group of PA2 members, PA1 of the members are ..."
It's more like "we can divide the total number in groups
of PA2 such that PA1 out of every group are ...".)

> Mathematically, li pa fi'u re du li pimu li pa fe'i re,
> and all three (with vei-ve'o brackets in the last case) should mean
> the same thing as sumti quantifiers.

We can postulate that, or we can postulate that the different forms
(that undisputably represent the same number) are used to represent
different quantifiers.

We have a similar issue with {ce'i}. {munoce'i lo plise} could
be "50% of an apple" or "50% of apples". In the proposal I make
{ce'i} equivalent to {fi'u panono}, so {PA ce'i} is "PA out of
every 100".

mu'o mi'e xorxes

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail