[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, And Rosta wrote:
> 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.
If "mi speni lo ninmu" is the best you can say, then you couldn't pick
your wife out of a lineup. Similarly, asking with "mi nitcu lo mikce" is
perfectly valid, because without further specification any doctor is
acceptable. So what has all the fuss been about?
--
// if (!terrorist)
// ignore ();
// else
collect_data ();