Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 15:05:02 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199711202005.PAA15542@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: And Rosta Sender: Lojban list From: And Rosta Organization: University of Central Lancashire Subject: nu & fasnu X-To: Logical Language Group X-cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 Content-Length: 884 X-From-Space-Date: Thu Nov 20 15:05:03 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU Lojbab: > It is most certainly the case that "nu" does not claim occurance. "fasnu" > is the predicate that claims actual or potential occurance, and takes a > "nu" predication as x1. But in my mind, a nu predication need not even > be a potential event, though perhaps it has to be a conceivable event. As Jorge said, an event must exist in space-time -- it must occur -- just as dogs, people, flowers, kisses do. If I understood John correctly, "nu" does claim occurrence (by definition: it means "is an occurrer"), but not necessarily in this world, unless preceded by ca`a. But exactly the same would apply to fasnu. Hence the difference between nu and fasnu is syntactic rather than semantic. IIRC (Netscape keeps on timing out when I try to reach xiron), fasnu is one place. But if you could say {da fasnu le du`u ....} then it would be virtually identical to {nu}. --And