Received: from mail-ey0-f189.google.com ([209.85.215.189]:44316) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SzEgC-00069B-Tj; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:24:46 -0700 Received: by eaan13 with SMTP id n13sf483772eaa.16 for ; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:24:33 -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=etsybjkZI5kn7yPb/RDG5K7MaquOMDjbt5jfDsoub4g=; b=f7w92eTi4+w5EmHA9wKB4Y0/FKruichI1j3WAUSNx0YZPjvci5E3QJgSndW9UO2mKA jT8KCfww5nENc9eImgD99c0CFwTgyBKGWVNh0an5yddp7f/l77QbgUcsK/v91LjQwTK0 2rpahaLCllmDKjG7d+dfTVfQhq7g47z7TvL0E= Received: by 10.216.195.214 with SMTP id p64mr300601wen.19.1344464670319; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:24:30 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.14.150.12 with SMTP id y12ls570212eej.7.gmail; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.182.7 with SMTP id n7mr9713103eem.6.1344464669413; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.182.7 with SMTP id n7mr9713102eem.6.1344464669404; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ey0-f179.google.com (mail-ey0-f179.google.com [209.85.215.179]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d5si29258006eep.0.2012.08.08.15.24.29 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.179 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.215.179; Received: by eaa13 with SMTP id 13so435982eaa.24 for ; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:24:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.215.197 with SMTP id e45mr24270503eep.36.1344464669279; Wed, 08 Aug 2012 15:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.14.178.196 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Aug 2012 15:24:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1a5f9ca9-75f1-409b-868c-5b7c3e6a9674@googlegroups.com> <1059afae-0f80-41eb-9a0f-e95bca0179ac@googlegroups.com> <1344353668.22980.YahooMailNeo@web184401.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <318ca405-4913-4081-9642-222bdfee3958@googlegroups.com> <1344375991.99278.YahooMailNeo@web184406.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 19:24:29 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Revising mu'ei and CAhA once again. Possible worlds. From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.179 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:35 AM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote: > > anyway, what is in your opinion the difference between {pu'i} and {ca'a}? In my opinion "pu'i" should be (re)defined as "actually but not necessarily". My reasoning is as follows: "ka'e" and "ca'a" have basic meanings, while "pu'i" and "nu'o" correspond to certain conjunctions of them plus negation. "ka'e" can produce 4 different meanings when combined with negation: ka'e na ka'e ka'e na na ka'e na "ca'a" can produce 2 different meanings: ca'a (= na ca'a na) ca'a na (= na ca'a) By combining the 4 ka'e-meanings with the 2 ca'a-meanings we could in principle achieve 8 new meanings, however 2 of them are contradictory, and 4 of them logically reduce to a non-combined form, due to ca'a entailing ka'e: ka'e je ca'a (reduces to ca'a) na ka'e je ca'a (contradictory) ka'e na je ca'a na ka'e na je ca'a (reduces to "na ka'e na") ka'e je na ca'a na ka'e je na ca'a (reduces to "na ka'e") ka'e na je na ca'a (reduces to "na ca'a") na ka'e na je na ca'a (contradictory) That leaves two interesting meanings without a simple form, that we can assign to "pu'i" and "nu'o": ka'e na je ca'a = pu'i ka'e je na ca'a = nu'o The official English glosses for "pu'i" and "nu'o" are somewhat misleading because they seem to mix them up with tense and/or aspect, but modality should be kept separate from tense and aspect, so I think these glosses are better: pu'i: "actually, but not necessarily" or "actually, but possibly not" nu'o: "actually not but possibly" or "actually not, but not necessarily not" mu'o mi'e xorxes -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.