From cowan Sat Mar 6 22:57:57 2010 Subject: Re: How jai and tu'a work To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu (Lojban List) From: cowan Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 16:22:36 -0500 (EST) Cc: ucleaar@ucl.ac.uk In-Reply-To: <199511201954.OAA00992@locke.ccil.org> from "ucleaar" at Nov 20, 95 06:57:31 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 729 Status: OR X-From-Space-Date: Mon Nov 20 16:22:36 1995 X-From-Space-Address: cowan Message-ID: > > >My maoste has {tua} = "the bridi implied by". > > Sounds like I need to change it to "the abstraction implied by" > > But then it's too vague to be that useful. The whole purpose of "tu'a" is to be vague (as well as brief). > "Abstraction", I take it, is > not a coherent semantic notion, but a syntactic notion, so I suppose > it means "whatever a NU can denote". In that case, tua can refer to > a truth value or an experience or a concept or, given {suu}, anything > whatever. Indeed. The abstraction operators create general terms which are true of (and force the existence of) certain abstract objects which are in various ways connected with bridi. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.