Received: from mail-pb0-f61.google.com ([209.85.160.61]:47922)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <bpfk-list+bncBCRZPH6MCMIPVKENQYCRUBCDCUBDS@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1ThLmq-0004M9-Ie; Sat, 08 Dec 2012 06:54:01 -0800
Received: by mail-pb0-f61.google.com with SMTP id wz12sf913853pbc.16
        for <multiple recipients>; Sat, 08 Dec 2012 06:53:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=x-beenthere:date:from:to: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=JSwrZFzxLi0Kq1xVx6H/3SjGnaCj7bkyDUKm7goV0ys=;
        b=Z8OVeidvi474r9IqDIpm1EKFmktJh2iytp3/ZIHEQ9KIH//flmJ4vY13wkRBQkCiTn
         jg0dgmc2byT3jZlNIOicgMk0+DFErYJQqHi37MalEdQVQKe/s9Kp90TXHaKQI0p10m7u
         dO8umxMFgtbB5Aa892Odi7YBI8saNlsCv5mVBgMKOF6+E9z+bt4sC5whqUWsq9gQ1cCO
         OHPV7fVQemhSdODFJk4SKsLnxXv6Ev9mwl8htMTh/SoKqew+pLs8h4O5okq0EZ+OkKQG
         BNzJIN/8kGEDLVbIXuIKUPe8LyYcdKmeZO4bhV7MmsIEvEFUFahqNtp3sk01aH7dJwBa
         y42w==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=x-beenthere:date:from:to: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=JSwrZFzxLi0Kq1xVx6H/3SjGnaCj7bkyDUKm7goV0ys=;
        b=O45wO9AZ/ug41jSqPuoSU7jwe+vlyG4vvqrItteY9UKy9WJLdePQHO6e02szE9KxU5
         LzXqbMTQTRBtxpZskk7g9VT5XUKdyG0JNsnRr9U469QTmIqSqvwOmtlhg2rb/3hctoOH
         cnFdi+BCy52a9rqlZgA/Z5TaHGIMTwD41wLZn8g1qub4+ZWjOKVganGGM37SEimkX6Tm
         z2pevfzLzPI1i7ILmIbCnbsh71YbUtuxq4bY6uCjlcgyg28h5c7j+cgWBf128rQnCxK8
         j4f5KA3r8eZ0LXteM7QjbWJ5ezFs46qneIo6Wy3yd2FBpF/g7FAR5ORoT5NC+4bodzEV
         Bo/Q==
Received: by 10.49.58.140 with SMTP id r12mr2065363qeq.35.1354978426151;
        Sat, 08 Dec 2012 06:53:46 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.49.18.99 with SMTP id v3ls937300qed.22.gmail; Sat, 08 Dec 2012
 06:53:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.49.72.169 with SMTP id e9mr2103744qev.3.1354978425901;
        Sat, 08 Dec 2012 06:53:45 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 06:53:44 -0800 (PST)
From: la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <19b747e3-b09b-49f5-8e07-59fb8d920441@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO7tK2cyQEHTbnSkMnZBwZakreVSq4Q+_EdVQHmhv9Q8O5ao8w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <95cdbee4-7ddc-4f7d-bb48-4591b7c3d915@googlegroups.com>
 <50C10003.1080806@lojban.org>
 <5406c1d2-ee78-4b41-ab68-06b7cf99dce7@googlegroups.com>
 <CAO7tK2cyQEHTbnSkMnZBwZakreVSq4Q+_EdVQHmhv9Q8O5ao8w@mail.gmail.com>
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: <bpfk-list.googlegroups.com>
X-Google-Group-Id: 972099695765
List-Post: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/post?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>
List-Help: <http://groups.google.com/support/?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list+help@googlegroups.com>
List-Archive: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en_US>
Sender: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
List-Subscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe?hl=en_US>, <mailto:bpfk-list+subscribe@googlegroups.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list/subscribe?hl=en_US>,
 <mailto:googlegroups-manage+972099695765+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_251_18819790.1354978424586"
X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /
Content-Length: 6066

------=_Part_251_18819790.1354978424586
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

As it's still a BPFK thread my question is why did you suggest moving {nai} 
to UI in the long run when it shouldn't have the truth value?

On Saturday, December 8, 2012 6:16:17 PM UTC+4, xorxes wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 6:35 AM, la gleki <gleki.is...@gmail.com<javascript:>> 
> wrote: 
> > 
> > Anyway, I want all types of negation to fit on the same scheme. 
> > Last time when I draw a similar scheme I could completely solve (at 
> least 
> > for myself) the problem of subjunctives in lojban. 
> > Now it's time for negation. 
>
> Negation is acheved with "na" or "na'e". They both have the same 
> meaning, just different scopes. "na'e" can pretty much be replaced 
> with "me lo na" and "na" can pretty much be replaced with "na'e ke ... 
> ke'e be ... bei ... bei ...". 
>
> "to'e" is not really negation, it is "opposite" or "antonym": 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposite_(semantics) 
> Calling it "negation" is just one of those weird Lojbanic 
> eccentricities. "no'e" expresses the midpoint between something and 
> its opposite, so it only really works with gradable antonyms. 
>
> "na'i" is a kind of negation, although what it negates is not explicit 
> in the discourse. It negates a presupposition, something that is taken 
> for granted as true, and therefore is not expressed. So na'i says that 
> a sentence cannot be evaluated as either true or false because 
> something prior that needs to be satisfied to even make sense of the 
> sentence is not being satisfied. Once the presupposition is expressed 
> explicitly, it can be negated with "na", as usual. "na'i" just 
> indicates that there is something unexpressed that wants to be 
> negated. So "na'i" is a metalinguistic "na". 
>
> "nai" changes the meaning of the preceding word to something with the 
> same function but different meaning, usually but not always an 
> opposite meaning. ".enai" for example is not really the opposite of 
> ".e" (indeed it is not clear what the opposite of ".e" would be, not 
> every word has a clear opposite). ".enai" is a logical connective 
> whose truth table is related to the truth table of ".e" in some 
> systematic way that can be explained using negation. 
>
> mu'o mi'e xorxes 
>

-- 
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/-/zD0_g6AhdRgJ.
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_251_18819790.1354978424586
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

As it's still a BPFK thread my question is why did you suggest moving {nai}=
 to UI in the long run when it shouldn't have the truth value?<br><br>On Sa=
turday, December 8, 2012 6:16:17 PM UTC+4, xorxes wrote:<blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #cc=
c solid;padding-left: 1ex;">On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 6:35 AM, la gleki &lt;<a=
 href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto=3D"dasQoXJZ19=
kJ">gleki.is...@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:
<br>&gt;
<br>&gt; Anyway, I want all types of negation to fit on the same scheme.
<br>&gt; Last time when I draw a similar scheme I could completely solve (a=
t least
<br>&gt; for myself) the problem of subjunctives in lojban.
<br>&gt; Now it's time for negation.
<br>
<br>Negation is acheved with "na" or "na'e". They both have the same
<br>meaning, just different scopes. "na'e" can pretty much be replaced
<br>with "me lo na" and "na" can pretty much be replaced with "na'e ke ...
<br>ke'e be ... bei ... bei ...".
<br>
<br>"to'e" is not really negation, it is "opposite" or "antonym":
<br><a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposite_(semantics)" target=3D=
"_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/<wbr>Opposite_(semantics)</a>
<br>Calling it "negation" is just one of those weird Lojbanic
<br>eccentricities. "no'e" expresses the midpoint between something and
<br>its opposite, so it only really works with gradable antonyms.
<br>
<br>"na'i" is a kind of negation, although what it negates is not explicit
<br>in the discourse. It negates a presupposition, something that is taken
<br>for granted as true, and therefore is not expressed. So na'i says that
<br>a sentence cannot be evaluated as either true or false because
<br>something prior that needs to be satisfied to even make sense of the
<br>sentence is not being satisfied. Once the presupposition is expressed
<br>explicitly, it can be negated with "na", as usual. "na'i" just
<br>indicates that there is something unexpressed that wants to be
<br>negated. So "na'i" is a metalinguistic "na".
<br>
<br>"nai" changes the meaning of the preceding word to something with the
<br>same function but different meaning, usually but not always an
<br>opposite meaning. ".enai" for example is not really the opposite of
<br>".e" (indeed it is not clear what the opposite of ".e" would be, not
<br>every word has a clear opposite). ".enai" is a logical connective
<br>whose truth table is related to the truth table of ".e" in some
<br>systematic way that can be explained using negation.
<br>
<br>mu'o mi'e xorxes
<br></blockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
BPFK" group.<br />
To view this discussion on the web visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.c=
om/d/msg/bpfk-list/-/zD0_g6AhdRgJ">https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bpfk-lis=
t/-/zD0_g6AhdRgJ</a>.<br />=20
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googleg=
roups.com.<br />

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-l=
ist?hl=3Den.<br />



------=_Part_251_18819790.1354978424586--