[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la nitcion cusku di'e
OK, tell me where the following fails:
mi djuno ro lo du'u makau catra la lauras.
= ro da
ro de poi de du'u da catra la lauras.
zi'epoi de jetnu
zo'u:
mi djuno de
These expansions usually fail with negative answers. If we
accept that "I know who killed Laura" must include the case
that when noone killed Laura, I know that noone killed Laura,
then the expansion fails. There is no true {de} such that
{de du'u da catra la lauras}, therefore your expansion
is vacuously true but makes no claim of knowledge. It would
be true even if I don't know that nobody killed Laura.
mi kucli lo du'u makau catra la lauras.
= ro da
su'o de poi de du'u da catra la lauras.
zi'epoi de jetnu
zo'u:
mi kucli de
Here the quantifiers are wrong. Surely for most da, there
is no true proposition {da catra la lauras}, yet you claim
that for every da there is at least one such true
proposition.
lo du'u makau catra la lauras. cu vajni
= ro da
su'o de poi de du'u da catra la lauras.
zi'epoi de jetnu
zo'u:
de vajni
Same problem with the quantifiers.
loi jei mi citka makau cu se xlura loijei le lenkytanxe cu vasru makau
= ro da
su'o de poi de jei mi citka da
zi'epoi de dunli la jetnu ku'o
ro daxi1
su'o dexi1 poi dexi1 jei le lenkytanxe cu vasru daxi1
zi'epoi dexi1 dunli la jetnu
zo'u:
lu'o de se xlura lu'o dexi1
Same problem, at least. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail