WikiDiscuss

I think the point is that if what comes after {lo} is {broda} the quantifiers on {lo broda} are just quantifiers on {broda}, while if what follows is {PA broda} then quantifers on {lo pa broda} are quantifiers on groups of {PA broda}, which cannot be be written without the {lo}. In other words, with {lo} you are talking about the whole phrase that follows in the sumti and what satisfies it, while with {le} you are talking about just what is said to satisfy the brivla that follows in the sumti (and then you are told how many there are. The external quantifiers work the same in each case; it is the internal ones that play different roles.
Jorge Llambías <jjllambias2000@yahoo.com.ar> wrote:

Robin:
> It seems to me that this changes *all* usage of "PA lo", because
> suddenly when you said "pa lo broda" and meant "One broda", you don't
> *get* one broda anymore, you get one *group* of broda, which is very,
> very different.

No, you get one instance of brodas. What counts as an instance
depends on context, but the most normal instances are individual
brodas, at least in cases where brodas are normally individuated.
What counts as an instance in {pa djacu} is much more context
sensitive.

But this is nothing new. {ci lo djacu} always could be three
glasses of water or three lakes, depending on context.

> su'o pa lo prenu cu prami do
> At least one person loves you.
>
> http://www.lojban.org/files/brochures/lesson4.html
>
> In your version, this means "At least one group of people loves you",
> does it not?

No, "at least one instance of people loves you". In the case
of su'o surely it makes no difference anyway, because "group"
must include groups of one.

> 19 May 2003 14:23:19 ci re'u ca pa lo cacra
>
> http://www.lojban.org/resources/irclog/lojban/2003_05_20-02_22.txt
>
> Again, your version would be "Three times in one *group* of hours".

(cire'u is the third time)

I'd say {cire'u lo cacra be li pa}.

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