[lojban] Re: {zo'e}

[scope845hlang343jbo@icebubble.org]

"Mark E. Shoulson" <mark@kli.org> writes:

> But they don't mean the same thing.  {lo na nanmu} is not the same as {lo
> na'e nanmu}.  {lo na nanmu} is a thing that doesn't {nanmu}.  But {na'e}
> is a *scalar* negator, not a logical one.  It implies some sort of scale
> of {nanmu}itude (lo ni nanmu), and says that what you're seeing is on the
> negative side of it.  Exactly what that would mean I'm not sure I could
> say for certain.  Is the scale {nanmu}<->{ninmu}?  In that case, a woman
> would be {lo na'e nanmu} as well as {lo na nanmu}, but a rock is {lo na
> nanmu} but not {lo na'e nanmu}.  But the scale here is not obvious.

I think you're misunderstanding the different types of negation in
Lojban.  Compare:

  .i mi viska lo na nanmu

  .i mi viska lo na'e nanmu

  .i mi viska lo no'e nanmu

  .i mi viska lo to'e nanmu

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lojban/867dofm9ym.fsf%40cmarib.ramside.