[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 05:24:19AM -0000, And Rosta wrote:
> Jordan:
> > On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 08:49:36PM -0000, And Rosta wrote:
> > > "(su'o) lo broda" refers to things individuated by virtue of
> > > being a single (countable) broda. "(su'o) da poi broda" and
> > > "(su'o) da broda" refers to things individuated somehow, but
> > > not necessarily by virtue of being a single countable broda
> >
> > But, as I said, I don't think "(su'o) da broda" has any relevance
> > to whether "(su'o) lo broda" and "(su'o) da poi broda" have the
> > same meaning. So I still don't understand your complaint
>
> In {da poi ke'a/da broda}, the truthconditions for {ke'a/da broda}
> should be the same as for "(su'o) da broda" -- that is, the properties
> that da must have should be the same regardless of whether it
> is inside a relative clause or not.
Ahh ok, I see.
So yes, but "da broda" requires the referent of "da" to be a single
individual broda in addition to whatever other types of single
individual it is, which is the same as "lo broda", I think.
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@hidden.email
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
bino57mmtszrU.bin
Description: application/ygp-stripped