[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la and cusku di'e
xorxes:
> la and cusku di'e
>
> >Certainly there is a difference between
> >
> > There is a man such that all week it has been the case
> > that John hits him
> >
> > All week it has been the case that there is a man that John hits
> >=At no time during the week has it been false that there is a man
> > that John hits
> >
> >I would have thought that
> >
> > la djan cu darxi lo nanmu ze'a le jeftu
> > la djan cu darxi ze'a le jeftu lo nanmu
> >
> >would respectively be the ways to express the two meanings. But I may
> >be wrong -- afaik, this precise point has never been discussed before
>
> I think that is not the way. I think {ze'a} refers to a single
> interval and not to all points in an interval as points
> To get that we have {roroi}:
>
> la djan cu darxi lo nanmu roroi le jeftu
> There is a man such that John hits him every
> time during the week
>
> la djan cu darxi roroi le jeftu lo nanmu
> Every time during the week, there is a man that
> John hits
>
> But {ze'a} should be a singular term
Okay, but then you wrote:
> la djan cu darxi lo nanmu ze'a lo jetfu
>
> CLL reading:
>
> su'o da poi nanmu zo'u (la djan cu darxi da ze'a lo jetfu)
> There is at least one man x such that: (John hits x all week)
>
> xod's reading:
>
> (su'o da poi nanmu zo'u la djan cu darxi da) ze'a lo jeftu
> (There is at least one man that John hits) that happens all week
>
> [xod's] reading is what I want to say. I don't want to say that any
> single man was hit all week, John may have hit a different man each
> day, for example. But the CLL reading with {lo} says that at
> least one of the men was hit all week.
So what is the difference between your and my versions?
I quoted the whole post because I don't understand the question. You suggest there is a difference between:
> > la djan cu darxi lo nanmu ze'a le jeftu > > la djan cu darxi ze'a le jeftu lo nanmu
I claim they are both the same: the first one in your
interpretation.
Xod also thinks they are both the same, but he thinks
they correspond to the second one in your interpretation.
You give relevant scope to both {ze'a} and {lo}.
I only give relevant scope to {lo} and take {ze'a} as
a singular term. Xod gives relevant scope to neither
of them. His interpretation (against CLL) matches my
original {la djan cu darxi lo'ei nanmu ze'a le jeftu}.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
_________________________________________________________________
Surf the Web without missing calls!�Get MSN Broadband.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp