Received: from mail-gh0-f191.google.com ([209.85.160.191]:55921)
	by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <bpfk-list+bncBCOZJTMR5YGRBPMPSKDAKGQEG6PXWOI@googlegroups.com>)
	id 1ThgFY-0001N4-51; Sun, 09 Dec 2012 04:45:00 -0800
Received: by mail-gh0-f191.google.com with SMTP id f1sf1410795ghb.28
        for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 09 Dec 2012 04:44:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender
         :x-original-authentication-results: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=3k6MlGEer81V7cOubcaFiFCbj45XLoMrzkzC0YiRD1M=;
        b=UHgijJAK9lfxpZvYo76EK9M0XZirC8lZA1df0T1kUUBLKrIq1Uh7Yr5fJiVsFdjoV6
         yV1odIgneidaCAhD1LBZv8u2YF3HOTWWkzk5Y7ySXZhI34dOqeM5ATYmY+C/tCZ+K2X/
         HJ0Z4mI2pNZygnpV2d8uyVdgYCi26YLgghPb6W09bFxXxh1W+KDwlm4vdpjZaJ8r9MYt
         WxdMAbwrpkdfAFEPFGSyPhrdxtSAwc+0j3yeK5wAxgphttnKkV+vU0VynREdtOkWo4cU
         0KmiMDrLVQBw1PFWZZT2QJvldD+9N65kxGOJ9ySIzEaUz5O7n08RNAA7vX0EhBSmemet
         Au/Q==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender
         :x-original-authentication-results: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=3k6MlGEer81V7cOubcaFiFCbj45XLoMrzkzC0YiRD1M=;
        b=EUOCP61eRKKOxlS5KxlfoQfpUTkVTOwqDT6NPw0P9hI4QvTqTr1HRbZ/S+FrA6+Ib+
         yTHhVsDVpxN9UrZfTO348WGDxZPpxhyzNONG4sIbS2G/YFYoS/ZhDS68v4M4kRF7gvNe
         hcOPFcXLMjvipTpH8e+Px5joqhvxh3GzRhbJ3y+wS9T1D6lTr/uEIdh2c2LZEAe2HrJB
         xuYWqP0/NX2yPS4iBJ4MeWvYlVRZgWDBnzk4hoP76BytJ0TeRzF8iH0WkGzgqqvG0+gV
         QL1aSYPuCKbWfrp5wV0CrjGNJSYuRBik5C8FVEZj1V3AX1LWXYrrWW8+moWwIcTshtGg
         o3hA==
Received: by 10.50.158.227 with SMTP id wx3mr1584801igb.2.1355057085343;
        Sun, 09 Dec 2012 04:44:45 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.50.208.2 with SMTP id ma2ls849981igc.22.canary; Sun, 09 Dec
 2012 04:44:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.66.77.162 with SMTP id t2mr2565685paw.7.1355057084963;
        Sun, 09 Dec 2012 04:44:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.66.77.162 with SMTP id t2mr2565684paw.7.1355057084953;
        Sun, 09 Dec 2012 04:44:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com (mail-pa0-f54.google.com [209.85.220.54])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id js4si3599343pbb.2.2012.12.09.04.44.44
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sun, 09 Dec 2012 04:44:44 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.54 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.54;
Received: by mail-pa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id bi5so1697728pad.27
        for <bpfk-list@googlegroups.com>; Sun, 09 Dec 2012 04:44:44 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.218.97 with SMTP id pf1mr30462426pbc.96.1355057084871; Sun,
 09 Dec 2012 04:44:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.66.88.200 with HTTP; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 04:44:44 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <b2895d02-f9c6-4cee-ae0f-e545eb3aecfe@googlegroups.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>
	<20121208182108.GI30125@mercury.ccil.org>
	<CAO7tK2e3_rjxi5j7-T6r_ivVEbdFtehJpzeS3QMdRAMaCsFXKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20121208194909.GK30125@mercury.ccil.org>
	<-2630662732168703446@unknownmsgid>
	<20121209025300.GF10989@mercury.ccil.org>
	<b2895d02-f9c6-4cee-ae0f-e545eb3aecfe@googlegroups.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2012 09:44:44 -0300
Message-ID: <CAO7tK2fw9R7=-10Bi0VVwGxM3sZE4Hm4icQ_A7GmGePmG5Z9ow@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bpfk] polysemy of {nai}
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: bpfk-list@googlegroups.com
X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com
X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com:
 domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.54 as permitted sender)
 smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@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: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/)
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /
Content-Length: 1651

On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 9:07 AM, la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1. {lo zmiku cu na'e xendo} is a false statement. Robots can't be
> kind/unkind or in the middle of that scale. The scale just cannot be
> applied.

In which case, rather than saying that it is false, it might be better
to say "na'i", the statement can't be evaluated as true or false.

> 2. {lo zmiku cu na [ja'e] xendo}={lo zmiku cu na na'e xendo}={lo zmiku cu na
> to'e xendo} is a true statement. The scale is denied.

None of those three statements deny that the scale is applicable, each
of them denies that robots fall in some part of the scale.
You would need "lo zmiku ge na xendo gi nai na'e xendo" to deny the whole scale.

> However, not taking into account the lack of the truth value in {na'i} the
> second example is the same to me as
> 3. {lo zmiku cu xendo na'i}

"na'i" by itself is not all that informative though. It says that
something is wrong with the assumptions of the statement, but there
are usually many things that could go wrong so you would probably need
to follow it with an explanation. You could say:

lo zmiku cu xendo na'i .i zy ge nai xendo gi nai na'e xendo

or:

lo zmiku cu xendo na'i .i zy na ka'e se merli fi lo ka xendo

or:

lo zmiku cu xendo na'i .i zy klani no da lo ka xendo

mu'o mi'e xorxes

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
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.