Received: from mail-vb0-f55.google.com ([209.85.212.55]:60811) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1VjOZa-00016e-Pz for lojban-list-archive@lojban.org; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 23:21:19 -0800 Received: by mail-vb0-f55.google.com with SMTP id 11sf1123645vbe.0 for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 23:20:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=jAVixgtZUf4IikM5ROgIW+Btqnq95egVO7BtTdnx+mU=; b=FjzRvultbdWLaWKGaVFtVuSOc/mEoblX0GJjQIgyWa10LxBM7AUlKrCpeYKZy9Euu3 40lrd6Y4M1O0m44M7vN/0fqJgeChecWnx9np8+zyc39VWc+jjAndF9XJNDsEenVMLF9t mLUy3DeaEwOeuKQ3n6MGBv/czjRg7wtNt/Q4w2fq8klGDPizB2gVjQc0Hkyxnbk80PLr Pi8VVVnGagGKh/XyGCtGr9RmhStmc5Jy39H6rmliqx6eG9XPAPbtKVR4sAQa4QklBpYm 8seftvlXrUPMbDF0I8782x34zHgrVL2MSyVdKzvaeqwVMvf9BC9P3jE8d3UGtdEQC2YY Zv1A== X-Received: by 10.50.44.2 with SMTP id a2mr730313igm.6.1385018458926; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 23:20:58 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.43.199 with SMTP id y7ls3296156igl.40.canary; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 23:20:58 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.67.14.70 with SMTP id fe6mr1602743pad.15.1385018458227; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 23:20:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ve0-x22c.google.com (mail-ve0-x22c.google.com [2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22c]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ee5si3966605vdb.1.2013.11.20.23.20.58 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Nov 2013 23:20:58 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lytlesw@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22c as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22c; Received: by mail-ve0-f172.google.com with SMTP id jw12so3630566veb.3 for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 23:20:58 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.58.46.171 with SMTP id w11mr4532211vem.5.1385018458051; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 23:20:58 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.58.161.48 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Nov 2013 23:20:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: MorphemeAddict Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 02:20:27 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] An Interesting Use for a Rafsi To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lytlesw@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lytlesw@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::22c as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lytlesw@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=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=089e013cbdf2331be104ebaabd83 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --089e013cbdf2331be104ebaabd83 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I don't think the position of "na" is relevant here. When someone says "I don't like cats", he usually means "I dislike cats". I like cats vs. I don't like cats (but I don't dislike them, either) vs. I dislike cats. English speakers typically don't consider the middle, non-committal option. Instead, they interpret "don't X" as "do opposite-of-X". Is this the "na'e" vs. "na" distinction of Lojban? stevo On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Gleki Arxokuna wrote: > I dont see a problem here .the more na is to the left the more vague the > sentence becomes . > On Nov 20, 2013 9:05 PM, "Jacob Errington" wrote: > >> I first pondered this idea when I noticed that many of us say {.i mi na >> djica lo nu broda}, when really we mean to say {.i mi djica lo nu na >> broda}. Let's suppose I have a child whom I want to be in good health, >> etc., as I should. Then, if that child is playing some dangerous game in >> which he or she might fall, then I should say {.i mi djica lo nu do na >> farlu}, as I do indeed desire something, namely that they not fall. Saying >> that I "don't want them to fall" isn't really accurate. I don't want them >> to fall, sure, but what *do* I want? I want them to not fall. I would find >> myself led to say {.i mi na djica ...} in Lojban due to this malglico >> influence, but I think that we should do our best to avoid it. >> >> Rather than speak in negations like this on top level, it would be more >> accurate to move the negation into the abstraction. But that's not easy >> since it goes against our natural language bias. Let's compromise. >> >> -nar- rafsi {na} >> >> Let's semi-systematically define lujvo using this rafsi as follows. >> >> narbo'e -> brode FA lo su'u naku zo'u ... >> >> Therefore, {nardji lo nu do farlu} means {.i mi djica lo nu naku do >> farlu}, which is more accurately representative of my actual desires than >> to say {.i mi na djica lo nu do farlu}. >> >> I have noticed that some lojbanists use {to'e} or perhaps another NAhE >> for this purpose. I think that this usage is overall inconsistent with the >> main uses of NAhE, since these cnavo are intended to modify the semantics >> of the following selbri. {to'e djica} in that sense doesn't make any sense >> at all, as what is the polar opposite of desire is rather elusive to me. >> Repulsion? Okay, perhaps {to'e djica} is fine then. But it requires in some >> sense that the listener and the speaker agree on the scales at hand. >> Therefore the NAhE solution works only provided such an agreement, whereas >> the -nar- solution functions independently of those semantic agreements. >> >> The -nar- scheme can be applied to other brivla as well giving us >> interesting results. >> >> e.g. {.i mi narju'o lo du'u lo mamta cu te vecnu lo cidja} "I know that >> mom didn't buy food." >> >> In the event that the selbri on the right of -nar- contains no >> abstractions, then we assume to obvious interpretation of -nar- which is to >> negate only the selbri, otherwise done by performing a bridi-final negation. >> >> e.g. {.i mi nardu'a lo plise do} -> {.i mi dunda lo plise do naku}. >> >> All in all, I think that this is a very powerful tool, not to mention >> that it allows is to modify the internal semantics of an abstraction from >> the outside, which is generally not possible. >> >> .i mi'e la tsani mu'o >> >> -- >> 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 post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > -- > 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 post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- 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 post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. --089e013cbdf2331be104ebaabd83 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I don't think the position of "na" is relevant= here.=A0
When someone says "I don't like cats", he usually means "= ;I dislike cats".=A0

I like cats vs. I don't like cats (but I don't dislike them, either= ) vs. I dislike cats.=A0

English speakers typically don't consider the middle, non-committal opt= ion. Instead, they interpret "don't X" as "do opposite-o= f-X".=A0

Is this the "na'e" vs. "na" distinction of = Lojban?=A0

stevo


On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Gleki Arxokuna <gle= ki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:

I dont see a problem here .th= e more=A0 na is to the left the more vague the sentence becomes .

On Nov 20, 2013 9:05 PM, "Jacob Errington&q= uot; <nictytan@g= mail.com> wrote:
I first pondered this idea when I noticed that many of us = say {.i mi na djica lo nu broda}, when really we mean to say {.i mi djica l= o nu na broda}. Let's suppose I have a child whom I want to be in good = health, etc., as I should. Then, if that child is playing some dangerous ga= me in which he or she might fall, then I should say {.i mi djica lo nu do n= a farlu}, as I do indeed desire something, namely that they not fall. Sayin= g that I "don't want them to fall" isn't really accurate.= I don't want them to fall, sure, but what *do* I want? I want them to = not fall. I would find myself led to say {.i mi na djica ...} in Lojban due= to this malglico influence, but I think that we should do our best to avoi= d it.

Rather than speak in negations like this on top level, it would be more= accurate to move the negation into the abstraction. But that's not eas= y since it goes against our natural language bias. Let's compromise.
-nar- rafsi {na}

Let's semi-systematically define lujvo usin= g this rafsi as follows.

narbo'e -> brode FA lo su'u naku= zo'u ...

Therefore, {nardji lo nu do farlu} means {.i mi djica = lo nu naku do farlu}, which is more accurately representative of my actual = desires than to say {.i mi na djica lo nu do farlu}.

I have noticed that some lojbanists use {to'e} or perhaps another N= AhE for this purpose. I think that this usage is overall inconsistent with = the main uses of NAhE, since these cnavo are intended to modify the semanti= cs of the following selbri. {to'e djica} in that sense doesn't make= any sense at all, as what is the polar opposite of desire is rather elusiv= e to me. Repulsion? Okay, perhaps {to'e djica} is fine then. But it req= uires in some sense that the listener and the speaker agree on the scales a= t hand. Therefore the NAhE solution works only provided such an agreement, = whereas the -nar- solution functions independently of those semantic agreem= ents.

The -nar- scheme can be applied to other brivla as well giving us inter= esting results.

e.g. {.i mi narju'o lo du'u lo mamta cu te v= ecnu lo cidja} "I know that mom didn't buy food."

In the event that the selbri on the right of -nar- contains no abstractions= , then we assume to obvious interpretation of -nar- which is to negate only= the selbri, otherwise done by performing a bridi-final negation.

e.g. {.i mi nardu'a lo plise do} -> {.i mi dunda lo plise do naku}.<= br>
All in all, I think that this is a very powerful tool, not to mentio= n that it allows is to modify the internal semantics of an abstraction from= the outside, which is generally not possible.

.i mi'e la tsani mu'o

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http:= //groups.google.com/group/lojban.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--089e013cbdf2331be104ebaabd83--