WikiDiscuss

1. Even generic {lo} seems to require that there are some of the things to keep from meaninglessness. But otherwise yes.
Jorge Llambías <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:
xod:
> Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote:
> >"It should be so that: CHILDREN forgive ADULTS"
> >
> >Nothing more. That's all the statement says. How you take that to
> >particular instances is up to you, it is not contained in the=20
> >sentence.=20
>
> How can it not be there from context? Part of the context of lo is that
> the speaker chose to use lo instead of some other gadri.

1.That's not how I see it. You cannot help but to use a gadri.
Otherwise you can't make a sumti. All that {lo} does is turn
a selbri into a sumti, it adds nothing else. If you want to
add precision, you have other gadri or quantifiers for that,
but using {lo} is like using {cu}, it's vacuous. You don't
choose it, it's imposed by the grammar as the minimal
selbri-to-sumti converter.

>Given that
> maxims are supposed to apply universally, and given that the speaker
> avoided ro, and given that the speaker is being cooperative, we must
> conclude that it's not a maxim. I am not saying that lo in this case is
> incorrect, but that it is unhelpful.

The speaker did not avoid {ro}, just as when you use {cu}
instead of {ca} or {pu} you are not avoiding {ca} or {pu}.
You simply don't care to be that precise.

> >The non-specificity of lo doesn't force anything about instances.
> >It is simply not a statement about instances.
>
> I have a hard time not reducing lo to an extensional claim in an
> extensional context such as this. Particularly, when the statement
> really should be derived from observations and falsifiable by other
> observations. Surely you agree that if NO lions hunt at night, then
> this non-extensional claim would be false, yes?

Yes. If you know that {lo cinfo cu kalte ca lo nicte} you
can conclude that {su'o cinfo cu kalte ca su'o nicte}.
And you can also conclude that {lo cinfo su'oroi kalte ca
lo nicte}.

But both statements with {su'o} are more precise than the
general statement without su'o.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/