From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jun 10 15:53:40 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1K6Cii-0001qt-Cp for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:53:40 -0700 Received: from cpe-071-075-215-096.carolina.res.rr.com ([71.75.215.96] helo=ixazon.dynip.com) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1K6Cid-0001qM-Lt for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:53:40 -0700 Received: from chausie (chausie.ixazon.lan [192.168.7.4]) by ixazon.dynip.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1253DCF065 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 18:53:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Pierre Abbat To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] Re: priority of se and na/nai in logical connectives Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 18:53:25 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 References: <200806110037.05049.eldrikdo@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200806110037.05049.eldrikdo@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200806101853.26101.phma@phma.optus.nu> X-Spam-Score: 2.2 X-Spam-Score-Int: 22 X-Spam-Bar: ++ X-archive-position: 14479 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: phma@phma.optus.nu Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list On Tuesday 10 June 2008 18:37, namor wrote: > Hi, I was told {broda .isejanai brode} wouldn't make any sense since: > > broda AND NOT brode == NOT brode AND broda > > But the line > "FTFT U with sentences exchanged and then second negated" from CLL:15:2 > indicates the contrary, > for the order is the other way around. > So it would rather be: > > broda AND NOT brode != brode AND NOT broda > > I also checked this by doing the swapping and then second-negating on a U > connective myself and it made sense. If, however, I tried doing it the > other way around it didn't work. > > Did I do a mistake or was I told wrong? {se.a} is the same as {a}. {se} before a logical conjunction makes no difference unless the conjunction is {u} (or ju, gi'u, etc.). {na} before a conjunction, and {nai} after it, turn the conjunction into the same conjunction with one argument negated. If the conjunction has {i}, {na} comes after {i}, e.g. {inaja}. To figure out what the grammar says, I'd have to peruse it, which I don't have time for now. But I ran some sentences through jbofi'e, and {se} is applied before {na} and {nai}. Now can you figure out what {teju} and {veju} mean? Pierre To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.