WikiDiscuss

---

> On Wed, Aug 18, 2004 at 03:27:27PM -0700, Jorge Llamb?as wrote:

> > Well, an example would be something like:
> >
> > ci prenu noi melbi cu klama
> > = ci da poi prenu zo'u da noi melbi cu klama
> > = ci da poi prenu zo'u ge da melbi gi da klama
>
> What is this an example *of*, exactly?

Of how to expand {PA broda noi brode cu brodi}.

> Is this intended to be an example of your solution for noi?

I'm not sure what you mean by my solution. The example shows that
{noi} cannot escape the scope of the quantifier when it is applied
to a quantified term.

> > lo'i broda ku'a lo'i brode vu'o noi se cmima ci da ...
> >
> > The intersection of the set of broda and the set of brode,
> > which has 3 members,...
>
> Ah. What about:
>
> [sumti list] vu'o [relative] = da po'u [sumti list] [relative]

That won't always work, especially if da is a singular variable.
Besides, which sumti is the relative attached to on the right hand side?

> > There's certainly no binxo going on. If ko'a was my cat and I reassign
> > the pronoun "ko'a" to something else my cat does not become that
> > something else.
>
> Oh! Point.
>
> Does "poi binxo da poi sinxa [sumti 1]" work for you?

No, there is nothing that becomes a cat here. Try an example
and you will see it makes no sense. If "ko'a" starts with some
referents and you want to make it have other, different referents,
then there is no possible restriction on the first set of referents
that will get you the second set. If it starts with no referent,
then no restriction on that will get you what you want either.
{goi} is just not a type of {poi}.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail