[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
John:
> And Rosta scripsit:
>
> > > > Is it right to say that lo'e cinfo cu citka lo antilope?
> > >
> > > The first is definitely false: it means "There is an antelope such
that the
> > > typical lion eats it", i.e. "Many, or most, or almost all lions eat
this
> > > antelope."
> >
> > No, that would be {lo antelope cu se citka lo'e cinfo}. {lo'e} is
clearly
> > scope-sensitive.
>
> I don't think so. Although we *infer* the properties of lo'e cinfo by
> generalizing over a bunch of lions, lo'e cinfo *itself* is a singular
> entity. So scope is effectively irrelevant here.
* pa broda is a singular entity too (in some sense), but is likewise
sensitive
to scope.
* Arguably the very possibility of examples like the ones under discussion
should be enough to prove the existence of scope effects.
* How on earth would you say "Lions have four legs"? According to you,
{lo'e cinfo cu se janbe be vo da} means "Exactly four things are legs of
lions".
* Recasting CLL-lo'e into a logical formula would (I reckon) involve some
sort of "typicality/characteristicality" operator, which would be scope-
sensitive.
--And.