John E. Clifford, On 11/09/2012 15:57:
> la bcda maybe says there is exactly one bcd, though that makes it a
> different sort of quantifier. Using it meaningfully may presuppose
> that there is only one bcd, so it is a rarely used quantifier.
>
> I guess, as always, the issue is what is the point of this critter?
> We can work around fairly easily without having to bring in
> presupposition (not common in logic) and nothing seems to be gained
> by adding it in.
For me the rationale is:
When there is only one bcd, quantifying over bcds is pointless and entails encoding unnecessary contrasts (s vs r). Speakers shouldn't be forced to encode information that they don't want or need to.
As for the frequency with which l would be used, Type A Users might use it often or even almost always, Type B occasionally, and Type C never.
--And.