Re: Digest Number 217

la djan cusku di'e

> > It should also be clear that a quantifier for Unique is a fourth
> > quantifier, different from those three. It can be argued that
> > it is a non-quantifier, because of its properties. Lojban {tu'o} 
> > is appropriate for this function.
> 
> Well, in that case, please argue it and make it clear. So far
> I've only seen proof my assertion.

{su'o broda naku brode} and {naku su'o broda cu brode} 
have different meanings. 
{ro broda naku brode} and {naku ro broda cu brode} 
have different meanings. 
{pa broda naku brode} and {naku pa broda cu brode} 
have different meanings. 

On the other hand:

{tu'o broda naku brode} and {naku tu'o broda cu brode} 
have the same meaning.

The same thing happens when you have two quantifiers: 
tu'o-quantified things can move around without changing 
meaning. ro, su'o and pa-quantified things cannot exchange
place with a differently quantified thing. (Indeed {pa}
can't even exchange places with another pa-quantified thing.)

tu'o-quantified terms (constants) are much easier to deal with 
than normally quantified terms.

mu'o mi'e xorxes


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com