[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Bob LeChevalier-Logical Language Group wrote: > Nora observes that since the ultimate definition of lo broda and le broda > pertains to things that fill the x1 of broda, and since for various broda, > the x1 place is expressed as individuals, sets, masses, and what have you, > then le/lo manifestly MUST be ambiguous amongst those meanings, regardless > of the specified default quantifiers and what people have deduced from the > assignment of such quantifiers. This is a strange argument. Who says that lo broda must be meaningful for any conceivable sumti place? -- // if (!terrorist) // ignore (); // else collect_data ();