From LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Sat Mar 6 22:53:26 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Received: (qmail 11660 invoked from network); 25 Sep 1997 02:48:19 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se (192.36.125.6) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with SMTP; 25 Sep 1997 02:48:19 -0000 Received: from segate.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <2.AF381492@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>; Thu, 25 Sep 1997 4:48:09 +0100 Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 23:49:48 -0300 Reply-To: Chris Bogart Sender: Lojban list From: Chris Bogart Subject: Location of "na" in sentence X-To: Lojban List To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: <199709250039.SAA13932@indra.com> Content-Length: 928 Lines: 21 Message-ID: On Thu, 25 Sep 1997, HACKER G N wrote: > Why at the END of the bridi? It doesn't make any difference where you > put the "na" in a bridi; its grammar and semantics are exactly the same. My understanding is that "na"'s position does matter in a sentence where we're using "lo" or "da poi" in a logical statment without a prenex. mi ponse lo mlatu naku => da poi mlatu naku zo'u mi ponse da = There exists a cat such that it is not true that I possess it = There is at least one cat I don't own mi na ponse lo mlatu => naku da poi mlatu zo'u mi ponse da = It is not true that there exists a cat that I posses = I don't have a cat We're trying to map a lojban sentence without a prenex to a formal logic sentence (which always has a prenex). The approved way to know what order the quantifiers and negations are supposed to fall in, is to take them in the order they're found in the sentence.