[lojban-beginners] Re: How versatile is "nu"?

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Ian Johnson <blindbravado@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't know, I somehow see {mi djuno lo jei lo broda cu brode}*  as
> considerably easier to understand than {mi djuno lo du'u xukau lo broda cu
> brode}.
>
> *I think I can say this in this way, though I might be wrong, since
> {djuno}'s x2 is labeled as a du'u in my dictionary...

As long as "jei" = "du'u xu kau", there is no problem.
But if "jei" = "se jetlai be lo du'u", then you would be saying that
you know TRUE (or that you know FALSE), which makes no sense.

If you put it in the context of different questions:

  ma cmene do
  "What is your name?"

  mi djuno lo du'u ma kau cmene do
  "I know what your name is."

  do xabju ma
  "Where do you live?"

  mi djuno lo du'u do xabju ma kau
  "I know where you live."

  ti mo
  "What is this?"

  mi djuno lo du'u ti mo kau
  "I know what this is."

   xo plise cu se lanka ti
   "How many apples are there in this basket?"

   mi djuno lo du'u xo kau plise cu se lanka ti
   "I know how many apples there are in this basket."

    xu do tatpi
    "Are you tired?"

    mi djuno lo du'u xu kau do tatpi
    "I know whether you are tired."

Replacing the last one with "mi djuno lo jei do tatpi" seems just
inconsistent. Why would the direct "xu" question have its own short
form for the indirect case, while all other questions don't have a
short form? I prefer to treat all questions consistently.

mu'o mi'e xorxes