From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Fri Apr 08 19:42:31 2005
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Fri, 08 Apr 2005 19:42:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.44)
	id 1DK5vU-00032n-7l
	for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 19:42:24 -0700
Received: from web81303.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.37.78])
	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with smtp (Exim 4.44)
	id 1DK5vS-00032I-Td
	for lojban-list@lojban.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 19:42:24 -0700
Message-ID: <20050409024151.72370.qmail@web81303.mail.yahoo.com>
Received: from [65.69.48.37] by web81303.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 19:41:51 PDT
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 19:41:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: [lojban] Re: Denoting counterfactual sentences in Lojban?
To: lojban-list@lojban.org
In-Reply-To: 6667
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--)
X-archive-position: 9804
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: clifford-j@sbcglobal.net
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-list


--- Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2005 9:24 PM, John E Clifford
> <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > The suggestion to put it into abstract form,
> {nu}
> > or {du'u}, is a good one except that it is
> hard
> > to see what the appropriate sentences would
> be;
> > what selbri goes with the abstract sumti. 
> 
> ko'a nu la suzan klama
> i ko'e du'u ko'a lerci
> i ko'i du'u la jan djuno ko'e
> i la suzan sruma ko'i

Nice!
 
> You can also use {ju'a nai} to mark something
> as a non-assertion:

I'm not sure what this would mean:"I don't state"
as an evidential.  So little evidence that I
don't really want to put it forth at all? But it
still seems to be an assertion.
 
> lo nu la suzan klama cu lerci
> i ju'a nai la jan djuno la'e di'u
> i la suzan sruma la'e di'u 
> 
More doubtful.