Received: from mail-fa0-f61.google.com ([209.85.161.61]:60177) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SbYx9-0002fF-L7; Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:12:21 -0700 Received: by faaa5 with SMTP id a5sf2738813faa.16 for ; Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:12:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=aHBodoHQKWaxPP/f8yendr55gFSATvznRruzRoPDgMY=; b=RF/77cJxD7KdlPGGynJgQyipjKiiG6/eJskR2ufoq8qU2MwHVZAdy3UuEeAN1bzvRE 3wbVsiWhCS70e4XaFcYM2eCu1Me4XZhiZUA9Wmvi3gtFf9VyKsqeTdgG9Xbx8a5djWV3 JMUNpCI/x2hwQ/0p9prz1nGdvpN5A87UIozdA= Received: by 10.204.150.91 with SMTP id x27mr394580bkv.18.1338822731604; Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:12:11 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.130.145 with SMTP id t17ls4148182bks.8.gmail; Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:12:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.143.145 with SMTP id v17mr2155222bku.7.1338822729957; Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:12:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.143.145 with SMTP id v17mr2155221bku.7.1338822729934; Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:12:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-f178.google.com (mail-lb0-f178.google.com [209.85.217.178]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p5si9554047bks.1.2012.06.04.08.12.09 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:12:09 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.178 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.178; Received: by lbbgj10 with SMTP id gj10so3296456lbb.9 for ; Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:12:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.152.144.133 with SMTP id sm5mr13442316lab.4.1338822729469; Mon, 04 Jun 2012 08:12:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.152.46.36 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Jun 2012 08:12:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 09:12:09 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban-beginners] xu kau From: Jonathan Jones To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.178 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com; contact lojban-beginners+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 300742228892 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f234963350e7304c1a6f54b X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / --e89a8f234963350e7304c1a6f54b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I always thought of xukau as intended to mean you're asking a rhetorical question. On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:21 AM, tengo wrote: > coi > > I have read about {xu} and {kau}, and I find most usage of {xu kau} > odd. As I understand {xu}, it puts the main bridi into question, not a > sub-bridi. Consider the following example: > > do djuno lo du'u la .frank. cu bebna > You know that Frank is foolish > > First I add {xu}: > > do djuno lo du'u xu la .frank. cu bebna > Is it true that you know that Frank is foolish? > Do you know that Frank is foolish? > > So, it's now a question. Then I add {kau}: > > do djuno lo du'u xu kau la .frank. cu bebna > Whether you know that Frank is foolish. > > Which is what seems odd to me. The CLL has an example in chapter 11: > > 7.3) mi djuno le jei la frank. cu bebna [kei] > I know the truth-value of Frank being a fool. > > And later in the text: "I know whether or not Frank is a fool", which > seems to be the intended meaning of {mi djuno lo du'u xu kau > la .frank. cu bebna}. > > So, is there a special rule for interpretation of {xu kau}? If yes, > where is it defined? Is the {jei}-version still correct with current > definitions of {jei} and {djuno}? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lojban Beginners" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. > > -- mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en. --e89a8f234963350e7304c1a6f54b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I always thought of xukau as intended to mean you're asking a rhetorica= l question.

On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:21 A= M, tengo <yurock.tengo@gmail.com> wrote:
coi

I have read about {xu} and {kau}, and I find most usage of {xu kau}
odd. As I understand {xu}, it puts the main bridi into question, not a
sub-bridi. Consider the following example:

do djuno lo du'u la .frank. cu bebna
You know that Frank is foolish

First I add {xu}:

do djuno lo du'u xu la .frank. cu bebna
Is it true that you know that Frank is foolish?
Do you know that Frank is foolish?

So, it's now a question. Then I add {kau}:

do djuno lo du'u xu kau la .frank. cu bebna
Whether you know that Frank is foolish.

Which is what seems odd to me. The CLL has an example in chapter 11:

7.3) =A0 mi djuno le jei la frank. cu bebna [kei]
=A0 =A0 =A0 I know the truth-value of Frank being a fool.

And later in the text: "I know whether or not Frank is a fool", w= hich
seems to be the intended meaning of {mi djuno lo du'u xu kau
la .frank. cu bebna}.

So, is there a special rule for interpretation of {xu kau}? If yes,
where is it defined? Is the {jei}-version still correct with current
definitions of {jei} and {djuno}?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegr= oups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/g= roup/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.




--
mu'o = mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi= .luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father= . :D )

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@= googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= -beginners?hl=3Den.
--e89a8f234963350e7304c1a6f54b--