[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
xod:
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, And Rosta wrote:
>
> > xod:
> > > "There are one or more doctors that I need", eh? And why is this wrong?
> > > It's safe to assert that doctors exist, isn't it?
> >
> > If you say "There are one or more doctors that I need", it can
> > be true even if there are one or more doctors that you don't need
> > I could bring you a doctor and you could say, "No, I don't need
> > this one; I need a different one". That's not the case with "I
> > need a doctor, any doctor". If I bring you a doctor then, you've
> > got to need this doctor
>
> If da is unrestricted, then da poi mikce is restricted only to doctors,
> and no further. Which means nitcu lo mikce is satisfied by any doctor
{mi speni lo ninmu} is true if there is a woman and I'm married to
her. It is not false if there is a woman and I'm not married to
her. It is false if there is no woman that I am married to.
But it doesn't mean "I'm married to any woman". The claim is satisfied
by any woman being my spouse, but not falsified by any woman not
being my spouse. OTOH, the "any-x" reading of "I need a doctor"
is not only satisfied by any doctor being needed by me but falsified
by any doctor not being needed by me.
The any-x reading can be captured by "I need it to be true that
there is a doctor (who is co'e [e.g. able to minister to me])".
--And.