Received: from mail-ye0-f185.google.com ([209.85.213.185]:50067) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Th2ZG-0005OH-8V; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 10:22:50 -0800 Received: by mail-ye0-f185.google.com with SMTP id l3sf393308yen.2 for ; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 10:22:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references :subject:mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence :mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=DHNNG5YIm6WJKh52KmdjhPL/1xYXLyeD1Uo6vorLsI4=; b=JPG+Y+0TqwwoSXKjiSl1L8lmW14PlNwJtFJV9Rg2VMbadnDCk30BsneH0aEknEnnK2 nZ5o5KCJMW1qIKgHdUiFjJ/TbK1T9N+4E590/aXGoZWR7VfIAh+k264DBRqDZolT0vPH EnsdF/bDWmnKf9D6nZ2STkHz4gPCTf72EYNwpPtSABqJa0jWqY7IBhkI4ekvHYorsKR7 QDgBQgxmxZKt7L2GTsabuR6hPRr/YHELcQUekl45IsRjAHvWNJDP7KhoZR3JhVyDFGEu AwnWqKuXXdVzwxwvmeM7NZGXmiQXzmPdYtGUTjy1cPtKq86wugPKJs3aKtZM8V3332lQ wSug== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references :subject:mime-version:x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence :mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=DHNNG5YIm6WJKh52KmdjhPL/1xYXLyeD1Uo6vorLsI4=; b=i+I/+7TSpkqHhldDjLfYGE9l8I0vWuMiUKvI+zEi7oqPGhyXnQGZvWXE1zuDODIMjO EOzD8gwwwcRpRP8OoAHogp7iMZxwMVCwijYhhLONB7FlZUNeqBdD6RGhhQT0x9rSEvRi f9TTVvL1NkAHHlSWzzl6HjiU/1RrAiKmg/RPZCiXxF36uI/MjTLuAmmFS7O5owJYurE2 6Cs1UuiKxUSUTvlAQHFOVXnsikykw5eGQA7MqtP0Wx828U3IctkFoOm6fe3lHJ53heO1 PeZgtXKC1XBHLDq8OzMPjrth4UD2m7ubOTTRFrRLVmR0cH/v5y0ZacQ837Ggr3G8Rm+c wxAw== Received: by 10.50.151.175 with SMTP id ur15mr2267014igb.0.1354904548088; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 10:22:28 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.50.100.234 with SMTP id fb10ls3892882igb.41.gmail; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 10:22:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.50.108.200 with SMTP id hm8mr2257669igb.10.1354904547218; Fri, 07 Dec 2012 10:22:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 10:22:26 -0800 (PST) From: la gleki To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Cc: lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com, cowan@mercury.ccil.org Message-Id: <12451bd9-6861-4830-a8d0-c5c5f382fe2c@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <20121207165143.GE26753@mercury.ccil.org> References: <95cdbee4-7ddc-4f7d-bb48-4591b7c3d915@googlegroups.com> <50C10003.1080806@lojban.org> <5406c1d2-ee78-4b41-ab68-06b7cf99dce7@googlegroups.com> <20121207165143.GE26753@mercury.ccil.org> Subject: Re: [bpfk] polysemy of {nai} MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com Reply-To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list bpfk-list@googlegroups.com; contact bpfk-list+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 972099695765 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_414_4966893.1354904546727" X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.1 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / Content-Length: 5674 ------=_Part_414_4966893.1354904546727 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Friday, December 7, 2012 8:51:43 PM UTC+4, John Cowan wrote: > > la gleki scripsit: > > > {na'e} says that we are somewere at another point but on the same scale. > > {no'e} says we are in the middle of the same scale. > > {to'e} says that we are at the opposite point of the same scale. > > Right. > > > {na'i} says that we are outside this scale (i.e. this predicate > > relationship) > > "Na'i" says that there's something wrong with the way the statement is > formulated. "Na'i I drove my car to work today" is a true statement, > since I don't have a car and in fact don't drive. > > > {na}. Here I have a problem. According to what I draw {na} means that we > > are not at this point of this scale and may be even outside this scale. > > So for me {na} is (warning! bad grammar follows) {na'i ja na'e}. > > "Na" is not about scales either. It says no more and no less than that > the rest of the sentence is untrue. "Na'e censa" is "secular", but > "ti na na'e censa" does not reduce to "ti censa" logically, though it > may do so pragmatically. > > > Anyway, I want all types of negation to fit on the same scheme. > > They don't, and aren't intended to. Lojban's round pegs will not fit > in your square holes. > Then explain me how one {nai} can give birth both to round pegs and square nails? I showed on my table that {na} means either {na} or outside the scale. This is what you are saying (""Na" is not about scales either") > -- > John Cowan co...@ccil.org http://ccil.org/~cowan > Assent may be registered by a signature, a handshake, or a click of a > computer > mouse transmitted across the invisible ether of the Internet. Formality > is not a requisite; any sign, symbol or action, or even willful inaction, > as long as it is unequivocally referable to the promise, may create a > contract. > --Specht v. Netscape > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bpfk-list/-/8qlIguhEM44J. To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en. ------=_Part_414_4966893.1354904546727 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Friday, December 7, 2012 8:51:43 PM UTC+4, John Cowan wrote:la gleki scripsit:

> {na'e} says that we are somewere at another point but on the same = scale.
> {no'e} says we are in the middle of the same scale.
> {to'e} says that we are at the opposite point of the same scale.

Right.

> {na'i} says that we are outside this scale (i.e. this predicate=20
> relationship)

"Na'i" says that there's something wrong with the way the statement is
formulated.  "Na'i I drove my car to work today" is a true stateme= nt,
since I don't have a car and in fact don't drive.

> {na}. Here I have a problem. According to what I draw {na} means t= hat we=20
> are not at this point of this scale and may be even outside this s= cale.
> So for me {na} is (warning! bad grammar follows) {na'i ja na'e}.

"Na" is not about scales either.  It says no more and no less than= that
the rest of the sentence is untrue.  "Na'e censa" is "secular", bu= t
"ti na na'e censa" does not reduce to "ti censa" logically, though it
may do so pragmatically.

> Anyway, I want all types of negation to fit on the same scheme.

They don't, and aren't intended to.  Lojban's round pegs will not = fit
in your square holes.

Then explain me how one {nai} can give= birth both to round pegs and square nails?
I showed on my table = that {na} means either {na} or outside the scale. This is what you are sayi= ng
(""Na" is not about scales either")


--=20
John Cowan  co...@ccil.org   http://ccil.org/~cowan
Assent may be registered by a signature, a handshake, or a click of a c= omputer
mouse transmitted across the invisible ether of the Internet. Formality
is not a requisite; any sign, symbol or action, or even willful inactio= n,
as long as it is unequivocally referable to the promise, may create a c= ontract.
       --Specht v. Netscape

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= BPFK" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bpfk-lis= t/-/8qlIguhEM44J.
=20 To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l= ist?hl=3Den.
------=_Part_414_4966893.1354904546727--