From pycyn@aol.com Sun Apr 15 17:36:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 16 Apr 2001 00:36:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 19611 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2001 00:36:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 16 Apr 2001 00:36:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO imo-m03.mx.aol.com) (64.12.136.6) by mta2 with SMTP; 16 Apr 2001 00:36:06 -0000 Received: from Pycyn@aol.com by imo-m03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.14.) id r.95.95b7160 (4322) for ; Sun, 15 Apr 2001 20:36:01 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <95.95b7160.280b9871@aol.com> Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 20:36:01 EDT Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: toldjuno To: lojban@yahoogroups.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_95.95b7160.280b9871_boundary" Content-Disposition: Inline X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 From: pycyn@aol.com X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 6556 --part1_95.95b7160.280b9871_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/15/2001 9:02:01 AM Central Daylight Time, phma@oltronics.net writes: > >Literally (as always, except when inconvenient) {naldjuno} is just {na > djuno} > >which could mean that he did not believe it at all (mostly what we want) > OR > >that he had no evidence for it OR that he did not appreciate the force of > the > >evidence he had OR that it wasn't true (OR some of those other things we > >don't work into our definition). > > No, that would be {nardjuno}. {naldjuno} is the lujvo for {na'e djuno} which > just negates {djuno} - the relation between the person and the truth is not > knowledge. It could be belief or surmisal, but it is not knowledge. > {toldjuno} > states that the relation between the person and the truth is the opposite of > Thanx. You raise two points: 1) the scale here is roughly a djuno bcd -a jivni bce - ?a jijnu bc - a krici bc - a pensi b (or c) - a na pensi b (one is tempted to say "not even" for {na} here) 2) Except for {na}, the negations seem to keep some of the underlying assumptions of the base word: both {toldjuno} and {naldjuno} keep that b is true in d, while {tolkrici} is probably not very different, if (as I suspect) at all, from {krici nake b c} and {nalkrici } = {krici na'e bc}. The others are less clear because, I think, the scale is not full, i.e., the {tol} forms are real special cases. constructing the series is going to be interesting, but the steps so far are clearly off the track in crucial ways. --part1_95.95b7160.280b9871_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/15/2001 9:02:01 AM Central Daylight Time,
phma@oltronics.net writes:



>Literally (as always, except when inconvenient) {naldjuno} is just {na
djuno}
>which could mean that he did not believe it at all (mostly what we want)
OR
>that he had no evidence for it OR that he did not appreciate the force of
the
>evidence he had OR that it wasn't true (OR some of those other things we
>don't work into our definition).  

No, that would be {nardjuno}. {naldjuno} is the lujvo for {na'e djuno} which
just negates {djuno} - the relation between the person and the truth is not
knowledge. It could be belief or surmisal, but it is not knowledge.
{toldjuno}
states that the relation between the person and the truth is the opposite of
knowledge - it has never entered his head.




Thanx.  You raise two points:

1) the scale here is roughly  a djuno bcd -a jivni bce - ?a jijnu bc - a
krici bc - a pensi b (or c) - a na pensi b (one is tempted to say "not even"
for {na} here)

2) Except for {na}, the negations seem to keep some of the underlying
assumptions of the base word: both {toldjuno} and {naldjuno}  keep that b is
true in d, while {tolkrici} is probably not very different, if (as I suspect)
at all, from {krici nake b c}  and {nalkrici } = {krici na'e bc}.  The others
are less clear because, I think, the scale is not full, i.e., the {tol} forms
are real special cases.  constructing the series is going to be interesting,
but the steps so far are clearly off the track in crucial ways. --part1_95.95b7160.280b9871_boundary--