Message-Id: <199709171525.KAA00471@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: Don Wiggins <dwiggins@BFSEC.BT.CO.UK>
Date: Wed Sep 17 10:26:21 1997
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Don Wiggins <dwiggins@BFSEC.BT.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: negated nitcu
X-To:         LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 393
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Sep 17 10:26:21 1997
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

> > What about "na'e nitcu"?

> Isn't this {mi na nitcu lenu le resprdainysar mi citka}?

"na" does not claim that there exists any relationship between the sumti and
can be interpreted as "it is false that".  "na'e" means other-than and
asserts that there is a relationship between the sumti but it is not the
particular selbri (in this case 'need').  A subtle difference.

ni'o co'imi'e dn.