Received: from mail-da0-f61.google.com ([209.85.210.61]:64163) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Ti8Fm-0003sS-I3; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:39:07 -0800 Received: by mail-da0-f61.google.com with SMTP id z8sf2395865dad.16 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:38:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; 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=I+nb2vty468vOJURQs5G+4yEmxkxl3L8lWU10vawAjg=; b=aVxZCz+d1OlEM+FskjnlVgk5xbk3MsAJv7BpBLKMIevTeWe2MKwJTSZCpSyvMmxU3s c43LX/T8qplJ4ycz0cUunB6aSBS0lgawn3i0mE2VlQ9O5oH3B2PIO2ziSdLEWuy8E5+y la+kfOImdDziCvc8/KKjmVWEtxkcDf2ygPHQxADTywSY9/ct8AjHUX4cvH4xRQorwx68 5j24P3/D1OiKUtaCOkqU5VaLsjEg0CrcX9a0n02gB/6adlsBsTL/nKG8+0wpaL2cB1aI fA554ZkAjVavLrfq3cFZtVHQotult97mycKFYF4dObEiCz3KfNG9gwH1HWsf3hSdGUf0 7Ifg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; 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=I+nb2vty468vOJURQs5G+4yEmxkxl3L8lWU10vawAjg=; b=dvCnmv2BMVypzNJgYC6yS2V9Qaa0vJjQHkRdge88X2yUeXskuDQjt2ApcX+mgeqspA HRuBHfLQqvMLcWEePdVVes2cRJ+x0Rwo9KB9YMa8sCcILGYY0zhB1UawAWVGoy05bTZr 6yxlAuynq9XFSXlM4xYpWUCRh+pfYsyy8caWKe5AzBpFG6Ssw5SUHLH+cCVx1gNoHT6k vDJePiBQl/SbmP8aRNwqdOi1w/M8tu/7yBWtwCKEGPZlBGv/x4X9KC9OcMDTWxN0WPP7 9FrQ0EfosViJYLWhSOszdqkng//cUVghMdVR1ECn9LblTxRr9HaYNtli63wEijjesUkh jEbA== Received: by 10.49.1.43 with SMTP id 11mr3460488qej.29.1355164731959; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:38:51 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.49.94.103 with SMTP id db7ls4403943qeb.69.gmail; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:38:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.58.198.227 with SMTP id jf3mr732506vec.36.1355164730268; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:38:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.58.198.227 with SMTP id jf3mr732505vec.36.1355164730238; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:38:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-vb0-f51.google.com (mail-vb0-f51.google.com [209.85.212.51]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h20si2489689vdg.3.2012.12.10.10.38.50 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:38:50 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.51 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.51; Received: by mail-vb0-f51.google.com with SMTP id fq11so2592154vbb.38 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:38:50 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.58.48.231 with SMTP id p7mr9914930ven.11.1355164730049; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:38:50 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.13.197 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:38:49 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <7aaaacb5-f54e-43aa-82fa-0237b183447d@googlegroups.com> References: <33272af0-7522-44d7-a040-e451bf851595@googlegroups.com> <96205a36-c08f-4ebe-877e-112c22a5aefc@googlegroups.com> <5c52564a-f822-49b1-b8c9-745f53613b34@v9g2000yql.googlegroups.com> <50BF56A6.2010105@plasmatix.com> <707bcf37-65b9-4b85-bef6-6b6fe9b71b23@googlegroups.com> <957759ab-eeb0-4275-88dd-b6d81c73a4e5@googlegroups.com> <7aaaacb5-f54e-43aa-82fa-0237b183447d@googlegroups.com> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 13:38:49 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: Why no "about" brivla? From: Ian Johnson To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: blindbravado@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of blindbravado@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.51 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=blindbravado@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: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01182b2658c39e04d083e05a X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.1 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --089e01182b2658c39e04d083e05a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Neither are easy to define. {za'i}'s problem is that it involves the "boundary" of events, which lojban is not very good at expressing. (As I think I mentioned earlier, the "fuzzy boundary" of events is really a big reason why reasoning about events in lojban is difficult in general.) My intuition about {za'i} is that it is much like a concrete {du'u}; if you "want something to be true" where its truth is "definite", you want a {za'i} rather than an ordinary {nu}. {zu'o} is inseparable from {rapli} but also seems to have some connotation of {gasnu} and {zukte}. mu'o mi'e la latro'a On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:44 PM, la gleki wrot= e: > > > On Monday, December 10, 2012 1:25:50 AM UTC+4, Latro wrote: >> >> I completely disagree with your za'i and zu'o descriptions. zu'o is abou= t >> repetition, not volition. za'i is about relative "sharpness" of the >> boundary of the event; tcini may be sharp or not. >> > > True. But this is how thse cmavo were defined (unofficially) in jvs. How > can you define them then? > Here are the current definitions. > > zu'o galfi lo bridi lo brivla .i x1 selzu'e gi'e se sinxa le bridi > za'i galfi lo bridi lo brivla .i x1 tcini gi'e se sinxa le bridi > > > >> http://dag.github.com/cll/11/**3/ >> >> mu'o mi'e la latro'a >> >> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:52 AM, la gleki wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, December 6, 2012 12:03:35 AM UTC+4, Latro wrote: >>>> >>>> I don't think the distinction between za'i/zu'o/pu'u can be >>>> straightforwardly achieved from inside, and at any rate trying to make >>>> Lojban non-redundant is a counterproductive effort. Lojban is delibera= tely >>>> redundant. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Yes, Lojban is redundant. And I don't say that we should remove >>> synonyms (like {mu'e =3D nu co'i}). This task cannot be completed as >>> SEMANTICALLY unambiguous language is not possible. >>> >>> za'i ~ tcini >>> zu'o ~ zukte >>> pu'u ~ pruce >>> >>> And of course there is a distinction between du'u and nu because gismu >>> having places with abstractions are not semantic primes. They can be >>> further split into tinier meanings (some of those meanings are actually >>> du'u and nu) but otherwise I believe that du'u/nu distinction is embedd= ed >>> into gismu. >>> If lojban lacks prepositions (which English has) because those >>> prepositions are inside gismu place structure then why du'u/nu is not t= here? >>> >>> I think that everything can be achieved either by >>> 1. fully understanding the meaning of gismu (which in the long run migh= t >>> require rewriting or clarifying such definitions) >>> 2. or by dealing with inner bridi. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> mu'o mi'e la latro'a >>>> >>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:23 PM, la gleki wrote= : >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, December 5, 2012 7:50:20 PM UTC+4, aionys wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> It took me a bit of searching to find this, but I did manage to find >>>>>> a discussion that corroborates my statement. The following post is b= y >>>>>> .xorxes.: >>>>>> >>>>>> Subject: [lojban-beginners] How versatile is "nu"? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 9:52 AM, tijlan wrote: >>>>>>> > Officially, the most generic/nonspecific of NU is "su'u"; but >>>>>>> people >>>>>>> > seem to use "nu" more often for the purpose of general abstractio= n >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The first thing I find odd about NU's is that they are called >>>>>>> "abstractors" instead of something more acurate like "subordinators= ". >>>>>>> What NU does is take a bridi and convert it into a selbri, so that >>>>>>> it >>>>>>> will not be used as the main proposition but as a subordinate one. >>>>>>> It's true that properties and propositions are abstract objects (as >>>>>>> are numbers), but for me there is nothing abstract about events. >>>>>>> Something that can be seen cannot be very abstract. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As for "su'u" as general subordinator, it was never used that way, >>>>>>> whatever its definition says. We can only speculate as to the >>>>>>> reasons. >>>>>>> One reason could be that Loglan had the equivalents of nu/ka/ni but >>>>>>> nothing like "su'u", and people just went on with that. Also, "nu" >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> "ka" being just one syllable, and with such distinct functions, the= re >>>>>>> wasn't much incentive to merge them. CLL lists "su'u" among the >>>>>>> "minor >>>>>>> abstraction types", which already suggests it was never thought of >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> the "general abstractor". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > Personally, I wouldn't find it particularly odd if someone use "n= u >>>>>>> " >>>>>>> > for a terbri which the gimste defines as "du'u" or other specific >>>>>>> > types of abstraction. For example: >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > mi jinvi lo du'u broda (I think that the proposition "broda" is >>>>>>> true) >>>>>>> > mi jinvi lo nu broda (I think that the event "broda" is true) >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > "jinvi"s x2 is officially to take "du'u". Is "nu" for such >>>>>>> objects of >>>>>>> > mental activity / logical operation discouraged? If so, why? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I suppose it's mainly tradition. One subordinator would probably be >>>>>>> all that is needed, but the nu/ka/du'u split is very entrenched. >>>>>>> "ka" >>>>>>> is used for incomplete propositions, where you need to keep one (an= d >>>>>>> in a couple of cases more than one) argument slot open. "du'u" is >>>>>>> used >>>>>>> mainly with propositional attitude predicates. It's a relatively >>>>>>> short >>>>>>> list, maybe twenty or so gismu. In most other cases you can use "nu >>>>>>> ". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Notice that the choice between nu/ka/du'u is dictated by the outer >>>>>>> bridi, the one that contains this one as an argument, whereas the >>>>>>> choice between the four types of nu: za'i/pu'u/zu'o/mu'e is dictate= d >>>>>>> by the subordinate bridi itself. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> This part makes perfect sense. >>>>> du'u/nu distinction is dictated by the outer bridi. >>>>> But za'i/pu'u/zu'o/mu'e distinction can be achieved using other >>>>> methods inside the inner bridi >>>>> (e.g. {mu'e =3D nu co'i} as tsani said in one of his audio lessons). >>>>> This completely ruins the idea of the necessity of du'u/nu distinctio= n >>>>> (after all many languages including even guaspi don't have such >>>>> distinction). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> mu'o mi'e xorxes >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Jonathan Jones wro= te: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 7:13 AM, selpa'i wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> la'o gy. Jonathan Jones .gy cu cusku di'e >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hey, I'm just telling you how it is. I'm not saying that {nu} >>>>>>>>> should be >>>>>>>>> the default, it just happens to be that it IS. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No, it's not. You're wrong. Why can't you accept that even after >>>>>>>> several people have shown you that you're wrong? You're providing = the >>>>>>>> beginners that this list is dedicated to with misinformation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> {nu} is not the default, so it's *not* always right. You can't >>>>>>>> djuno a nu, nor can you zenba a nu. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As I said, I'm not saying that I agree with it, nor am I saying I >>>>>>> think it's correct. What I AM saying is that that is how it is, reg= ardless >>>>>>> of whether it makes sense, regardless of what the definitions of th= e >>>>>>> various NU are, and regardless of whether it should be something el= se. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That said, I do happen to agree with you. That, however, is not my >>>>>>> point. This is not my opinion, it is the current state of the langu= age. And >>>>>>> I am not the first nor the last to find things about this language = that >>>>>>> could - or indeed, should- be changed for the better. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> mu'o mi'e la selpa'i >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo je nai zo lejb= o >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> do=E1=BB=8B m=C3=A8lbi mlen=C3=AC'u >>>>>>>> .i do c=C3=A0tlu ki'u >>>>>>>> ma fe la x=C3=A0mpre =C5=ADu >>>>>>>> .i do t=C3=ACnsa c=C3=A0rmi >>>>>>>> gi je s=C3=ACrji se t=C3=A0rmi >>>>>>>> .i ta=E1=BB=8B bo da'i pu c=C3=ACtka lo gr=C3=A0na ku >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "Lojban Beginners" group. >>>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to lojban-b...@googlegroups.**** >>>>>>>> com. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginne...@**= g >>>>>>>> **ooglegroups****.com. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** >>>>>>>> group******/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 ) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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" group. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/= * >>>>> *ms**g/lojban/-/0DofaH09d9AJ >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@** >>>>> googlegroups.com. >>>>> >>>>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**grou= p >>>>> **/lojban?hl=3Den . >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "lojban" group. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/** >>> msg/lojban/-/t31x6rKEeG0J >>> . >>> >>> To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@** >>> googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** >>> group/lojban?hl=3Den . >>> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "lojban" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/yiYMNcQUlAoJ. > > 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=3Den. > --=20 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@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den. --089e01182b2658c39e04d083e05a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Neither are easy to define.

{za'i}'s problem is that it invo= lves the "boundary" of events, which lojban is not very good at e= xpressing. (As I think I mentioned earlier, the "fuzzy boundary" = of events is really a big reason why reasoning about events in lojban is di= fficult in general.) My intuition about {za'i} is that it is much like = a concrete {du'u}; if you "want something to be true" where i= ts truth is "definite", you want a {za'i} rather than an ordi= nary {nu}.

{zu'o} is inseparable from {rapli} but also seems to have some conn= otation of {gasnu} and {zukte}.

mu'o mi'e la latro'a
On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:44 PM, la gleki = <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:


On Monday, Decembe= r 10, 2012 1:25:50 AM UTC+4, Latro wrote:
I completely disagree with your za'i and zu'o descriptions. zu'= o is about repetition, not volition. za'i is about relative "sharp= ness" of the boundary of the event; tcini may be sharp or not.

True. But this is how thse cmavo wer= e defined (unofficially) in jvs. How can you define them then?
He= re are the current definitions.

zu'o=C2=A0galf= i lo bridi lo brivla .i x1 selzu'e gi'e se sinxa le bridi
za'i=C2=A0galfi lo bridi lo brivla .i x1 tcini gi'e se sinxa l= e bridi


On Thu, Dec 6, 20= 12 at 8:52 AM, la gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com&= gt; wrote:


On Thursday, December 6, 2012 1= 2:03:35 AM UTC+4, Latro wrote:
I don't think the distinction between za'i/zu'o/pu'u can be= straightforwardly achieved from inside, and at any rate trying to make Loj= ban non-redundant is a counterproductive effort. Lojban is deliberately red= undant.


Yes, Lojban =C2=A0is = redundant. =C2=A0And I don't say that we should remove synonyms (like {= mu'e =3D nu co'i}). This task cannot be completed as SEMANTICALLY u= nambiguous language is not possible.

za'i ~ tcini
zu'o ~ zukte
pu'u ~ pruce

And of = course there is a distinction between du'u and nu because gismu having = places with abstractions are not semantic primes. They can be further split= into tinier meanings (some of those meanings are actually du'u and nu)= but otherwise I=C2=A0believe=C2=A0that du'u/nu distinction is embedded= into gismu.
If lojban lacks prepositions (which English has) because those prepositions= are inside gismu place structure then why du'u/nu is not there?
I think that everything can be achieved either by=C2=A0
1. fully= understanding the meaning of gismu (which in the long run might require re= writing or clarifying such definitions)
2. or by dealing with inner bridi.




mu'o mi'e la latro'a

On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:23 PM, la gleki <= ;gleki.is...@gmail.com> wrote:


On Wednes= day, December 5, 2012 7:50:20 PM UTC+4, aionys wrote:
It took me a bit of searching to find this, but I did manage to find a= discussion that corroborates my statement. The following post is by .xorxe= s.:

Subject: [lojban-beginners] How versatile is "nu"?

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <= jjlla...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010= at 9:52 AM, tijlan <jbot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Officially, the most generic/nonspecific of NU is "s= u'u"; but people
> seem to use "nu" more often for the purpose of = general abstraction.

The first thing I find odd about NU's is that they a= re called
"abstractors" instead of something more acurate like "subord= inators".
What NU does is take a bridi and convert it into a selbri, so = that it
will not be used as the main proposition but as a subordinate one.
It's true that properties and propositions are abstract ob= jects (as
are numbers), but for me there is nothing abstract about event= s.
Something that can be seen cannot be very abstract.

As for "su'u" as general subordinator, it was never used that= way,
whatever its definition says. We can only speculate as to the reasons.
One reason could be that Loglan had the equivalents of nu/ka/n= i but
nothing like "su'u", and people just went on with that. Also,= "nu" and
"ka" being just one syllable, and with such distinct functions, t= here
wasn't much incentive to merge them. CLL lists "su'u" amo= ng the "minor
abstraction types", which already suggests it was never t= hought of as
the "general abstractor".

> Personally, I wouldn't find it particularly odd if someone use &qu= ot;nu"
> for a terbri which the gimste defines as "du'u" or other= specific
> types of abstraction. For example:
>
> =C2=A0mi jinvi lo du'u broda (I think that the proposition "b= roda" is true)
> =C2=A0mi jinvi lo nu broda (I think that the event "= broda" is true)
>
> "jinvi"s x2 is officially to take "du'u". Is &= quot;nu" for such objects of
> mental activity / logical operation discouraged? If so, why?

I suppose it's mainly tradition. One subordinator would probably = be
all that is needed, but the nu/ka/du'u split is very entre= nched. "ka"
is used for incomplete propositions, where you need to keep one (and
in a couple of cases more than one) argument slot open. "du'u"= ; is used
mainly with propositional attitude predicates. It's a relatively short<= br> list, maybe twenty or so gismu. In most other cases you can use "nu".

Notice that the choice between nu/ka/du'u is dictated by t= he outer
bridi, the one that contains this one as an argument, whereas the
choice between the four types of nu: za'i/pu'u/zu'= o/mu'e is dictated
by the subordinate bridi itself.
<= div>
This part makes perfect sense.
du'u/nu dis= tinction is dictated by the outer bridi.
But=C2=A0=C2=A0za'i/= pu'u/zu'o/mu'e distinction can be achieved using other methods = inside the inner bridi
(e.g. {mu'e =3D nu co'i} as tsani said in one of his audio les= sons).
This completely ruins the idea of the necessity of du'= u/nu distinction (after all many languages including even guaspi don't = have such distinction).
=C2=A0

mu'o mi'e xorxes

On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Jonathan Jones <= eye...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 7:13 AM, selpa&= #39;i <m...@plasmatix.com> wrote:
=
la'o gy. Jonathan Jones .gy cu cusku di'e

Hey, I'm just telling you how it is. I'm not saying that {nu} shoul= d be
the default, it just happens to be that it IS.

No, it's not. You're wrong. Why can't you accept that even afte= r several people have shown you that you're wrong? You're providing= the beginners that this list is dedicated to with misinformation.

{nu} is not the default, so it's *not* always right. You can't djun= o a nu, nor can you zenba a nu.

As I said, I= 'm not saying that I agree with it, nor am I saying I think it's co= rrect. What I AM saying is that that is how it is, regardless of whether it= makes sense, regardless of what the definitions of the various NU are, and= regardless of whether it should be something else.

That said, I do happen to agree with you. That, however, is not my poin= t. This is not my opinion, it is the current state of the language. And I a= m not the first nor the last to find things about this language that could = - or indeed, should- be changed for the better.
=C2=A0
mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

--
pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo je nai zo lejbo

do=E1=BB=8B m=C3=A8lbi mlen=C3=AC'u
=C2=A0 =C2=A0.i do c=C3=A0tlu ki'u
ma fe la x=C3=A0mpre =C5=ADu
=C2=A0 =C2=A0.i do t=C3=ACnsa c=C3=A0rmi
gi je s=C3=ACrji se t=C3=A0rmi
=C2=A0 =C2=A0.i ta=E1=BB=8B bo da'i pu c=C3=ACtka lo gr=C3=A0na ku


.



.

--
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-b...@googlegroups.= com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginne...@g= ooglegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/<= u>group/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 Sid= e! Luke, I am your father. :D )




--
= 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 yo= ur father. :D )

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com= /d/msg/lojban/-/0DofaH09d9AJ.

= =20 To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@google= groups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/grou= p/lojban?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com= /d/msg/lojban/-/t31x6rKEeG0J.

=20 To post to this group, send email to loj...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+un...@google= groups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/grou= p/lojban?hl=3Den.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com= /d/msg/lojban/-/yiYMNcQUlAoJ.
=20 To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojba= n?hl=3Den.

--
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@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--089e01182b2658c39e04d083e05a--