Date:  Sun, 11 Jan 1998 09:54:06 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199801111454.JAA23533@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>
Subject:      Re: knowledge & belief
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-UIDL: 5dcc363c63c8f38c86620af873dbdffa
Status: RO
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 511
X-From-Space-Date: Mon Jan 12 15:56:13 1998
X-From-Space-Address: -

>Something like that, yes, but I wanted to use jei to make the abstracted
>predicated sumti fuzzy, instead of the whole bridi. What about:
>
><mi djuno leli pa jei du'u la xorxes kau porpi gasnu le rulja'o fo le za'u
>ni racli senpi>

Almost. It should be:

    mi djuno le du'u li pa jei la xorxes porpygasnu le rulja'o kei kei fo
...

i.e the x2 of djuno is {le du'u ...}, and you need the two {kei} to close
the {jei} and {du'u} abstractions so that the next sumti is not sucked
into them.

co'o mi'e xorxes