*I don't see a valid reason to bother using tu'o over lo pa here. Also, I generally see tu'o used with du'u. Is there a semantic difference between that and le du'u? It seems as exactly the singleton category, making gadri redundant. What does lo 2 du'u mean? --[[User:xod|xod]]
*The reason is given under points (6) & (7) above. You may not think them valid, but those who do think them valid can use ''tu'o''. --[[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]
*I don't find them valid. For every number except 1 we're supposed to use lo ny., and with 1 we don't announce the number but resort to a completely different digit which only implies 1, and hide the gadri? That is inelegant. I don't understand what truthconditional claim is made by lo pa which isn't by tu'o, or why it would be a problem. Complaints about lexical redundancy would lead one to stick with the standard formula instead of taking advantage of tu'o, which was not invented for this purpose at all. --[[User:xod|xod]]
*For any number, including 1, ''lo PA'' will make a truthconditional claim about the cardinality of lo'i broda. As explained in the summary, sometimes we don't want to make a truthconditional claim that there is only one broda, but if there happens to be only one then it is desirable to have a very simple way to indicate it (for reasons explained in the summary). The complaints about lexical redundancy are complaints about unneutralizable contrasts: Lojban makes such categories as tense and number optional, but it makes categories of specificity and distributivity obligatory, even when they are vacuous.
* What other sort of claim is possible in Lojban besides a truthconditional claim? An attitudinal claim? --[[User:xod|xod]]
* So-called 'presuppositions', which are propositions that are not part of what the speaker is asserting to be true. By default, Lojban does not use presupposition, but it uses it in at least the following cases. (1) Some UI. (2) Within e-gadri descriptions. (3) Within voi clauses. --[[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]
* What is wrong with making a truthconditional claim concerning the quantification? That if the number turns out to be other than pa, the entire claim is disqualified? --[[User:xod|xod]]
* There are various things wrong, such as our wish to be helpful to our interlocutor while at the same time claiming no more than we wish to. But a concrete example is that ''na ku lo pa broda cu brode'' does not entail ''no da cu brode'', which is what one would ordinarily wish it to entail. --[[User:And Rosta|And Rosta]]