From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:53:24 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 16065 invoked from network); 25 Sep 1997 16:22:20 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 25 Sep 1997 16:22:20 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <11.6A7F429A@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Thu, 25 Sep 1997 18:22:16 +0100 Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 17:15:33 GMT+0 Reply-To: And Rosta Sender: Lojban list From: And Rosta Organization: University of Central Lancashire Subject: ja`a/na go`i To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu Content-Length: 865 Lines: 22 Message-ID: Don: > la .and cusku di'e > > I know that "na broda .ije ja`a go`i" is defined as a contradiction > > rather than a tautology, because "ja`a" substitutes for "na" > > rather than taking "na broda" within its scope. > > I didn't know that "na broda .ije ja`a go`i" is defined as a contradiction. > Does this mean that "go'i" = "broda" in this case? In this example, "go`i" = "na broda", "na go`i" = "na broda", and "ja`a go`i" = "broda". So it's not as bad as you feared. This is from memory of a Woldemarian pronouncement when the issue was discussed on Lojban list some time in the last 3 or 4 years. It must be in the Book somewhere, but I'm not sure where to look it up. [BTW, it wd be good in the longrun if one could search the online grammar according to selma`o. So I could ask for NA + GO`A and get directed to passages discussing both of these.] --And