From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Mar 15 17:18:19 2010
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:18:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.71)	(envelope-from <nobody@digitalkingdom.org>)	id 1NrKUE-0007PV-VW	for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:18:19 -0700
Received: from mail-bw0-f219.google.com ([209.85.218.219])	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)	(envelope-from <jjllambias@gmail.com>)	id 1NrKU4-0007Ns-87	for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:18:16 -0700
Received: by bwz19 with SMTP id 19so223281bwz.26        for <lojban-beginners@lojban.org>; Mon, 15 Mar 2010 17:18:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references         :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type         :content-transfer-encoding;        bh=CMvOQY2TM9WJFXzyIk3NVgWP/tDtSiBSyYSDe+XOoz8=;        b=unBPGEaTbm2rRGVXn+Mb2cS1IzEQvnE8N1Jvpi3yptHlSaj1n/YxaR8GLjMHw7upUD         kGULuMFHm52ZoSloiSSfnxaudYMmVIWCd+1EMYP1usg2Xi7MXCnhJ1dXb7EkkY/Jkac9         63OE4uRs6InnlNzHX+eBC7Cs87H97L0gN9sRo=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;        b=ahH9JzAYFdul8jVvSLIlWqWs3fiSi50g6AwM29QpCV2S1LfPQv5Chqi6doU6f6QXBK         DHIuyXoapotb8Cm8NGFDb7bpcjGe+3z3Ks7Mme+8PCi7vd9WO7w5HvBOWXy3E94+Lq+j         G9dskBp4kmBkQ71P3NzQl20bodryXQC7jdHp4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.133.129 with SMTP id f1mr6755625bkt.45.1268698681437; Mon, 	15 Mar 2010 17:18:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1f1080831003151545n6b3a1bd4x34eebbdaaebaa786@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4de8c3931003130452v3473ee1ei70da65f022ac2b1b@mail.gmail.com>	 <925d17561003140741o4dda967cn5da839d5f69fdeb2@mail.gmail.com>	 <1f1080831003150959g65a0df85ve65508bc16cbdb0f@mail.gmail.com>	 <925d17561003151014p415766a4n310d69d20b72bac7@mail.gmail.com>	 <16d9defd1003151126j12806949q6f3b676b05ed35ac@mail.gmail.com>	 <16d9defd1003151137mba5fc38lba8b846c6faac933@mail.gmail.com>	 <96f789a61003151223y40cbd6a8s8c0a5041d89ffcb0@mail.gmail.com>	 <1f1080831003151435u2d8df14eo26bb0a4f60a33c2@mail.gmail.com>	 <925d17561003151529l45aae38aiac525e7e832e0db3@mail.gmail.com>	 <1f1080831003151545n6b3a1bd4x34eebbdaaebaa786@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 21:18:01 -0300
Message-ID: <925d17561003151718y716cdc5cn4464653606e722f0@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: How versatile is "nu"?
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by Ecartis
X-archive-position: 3016
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-beginners

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't know, I somehow see {mi djuno lo jei lo broda cu brode}*  as
> considerably easier to understand than {mi djuno lo du'u xukau lo broda cu
> brode}.
>
> *I think I can say this in this way, though I might be wrong, since
> {djuno}'s x2 is labeled as a du'u in my dictionary...

As long as "jei" = "du'u xu kau", there is no problem.
But if "jei" = "se jetlai be lo du'u", then you would be saying that
you know TRUE (or that you know FALSE), which makes no sense.

If you put it in the context of different questions:

  ma cmene do
  "What is your name?"

  mi djuno lo du'u ma kau cmene do
  "I know what your name is."

  do xabju ma
  "Where do you live?"

  mi djuno lo du'u do xabju ma kau
  "I know where you live."

  ti mo
  "What is this?"

  mi djuno lo du'u ti mo kau
  "I know what this is."

   xo plise cu se lanka ti
   "How many apples are there in this basket?"

   mi djuno lo du'u xo kau plise cu se lanka ti
   "I know how many apples there are in this basket."

    xu do tatpi
    "Are you tired?"

    mi djuno lo du'u xu kau do tatpi
    "I know whether you are tired."

Replacing the last one with "mi djuno lo jei do tatpi" seems just
inconsistent. Why would the direct "xu" question have its own short
form for the indirect case, while all other questions don't have a
short form? I prefer to treat all questions consistently.

mu'o mi'e xorxes