[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
mark:
> --- In jboske@yahoogroups.com, Invent Yourself <xod@t...> wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Aug 2003, Jorge Llamb�as wrote:
> > > In XS:
> > >
> > > le ci broda: "the three broda", the group, one entity.
> > >
> > > ro le ci broda: "Each of the three broda", each member of the
group,
> > > three entities.
> > >
> > > What do you understand by "plurality"?
> >
> > Dr. Rosta's XS gives: {ci lo re plise} = "three pairs of apples"
>
> These two definitions are not consistent with one another. By the
> second one, (in which {ci lo re plise} means "three pairs of apples"),
> {ro le ci broda} would mean "all the triples of brodas" (assuming that
> lo and le quantify the same way, which I'll grant is not a given). I
> don't know that xorxes' XS and And's are definitely intended to be in
> perfect agreement, but it looks like they aren't here.
There's no disagreement. (No, me & xorxes are not conspiring behind the
scenes; it's just that XS is very straightforward so not susceptible to
disagreement.)
{le} always involves a reference to a specific single thing. In the case
of {le ci plise} it is a reference to a specific single trio of apples.
{le ci plise} and {lo ci plise} both refer to sorts of apple trios.
{le ci plise} refers to a specific apple trio (or at least, something
described as an apple trio), and {lo ci plise} refers to the one and
only Mr Apple Trio. Where the asymmetry comes in is that {PA le ci plise}
quantifies over members of the apple trio, while {PA lo ci plise}
quantifies over avatars (instances, exemplars) of Mr Apple Trio. To
quantify over members of Mr Apple Trio, you have to use {PA lu'a lo ci
plise}.
In XS, "all the (unspecified number of) trios of apples" would be
{ro le ro lo ci plise}.
ro = each of
le = specific
ro = unspecified cardinality [necessary here to separate le & lo]
--And.