Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: ci lo gerku vs lo ci gerku

[Michael Turniansky <mturniansky@gmail.com>]

2011/5/10 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Michael Turniansky
<mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> That's right, I am saying that "lo no gerku cu broda",
> for any value of broda, asserts one thing, and one thing only, that "lo
> gerku cu nomei".

Surely with your reasoning it also imparts the information that "lo
gerku cu pamei" and "lo gerku cu remei" and "lo gerku cu cimei", and
"lo gerku cu pai mei", and any number of other things. Why would the
predicate "no mei" impart information if none of the others do?

> Therefore it's neither contradictory, nor meaningless, nor
> nonsense.

Saying of something that it is nomei is kind of contradictory.

>  It does make an assertion, it does impart information (that we
> have no dogs), it just imparts it in an efficient way, and does not impart
> any other information that it might on the surface appear to.

I think "no gerku cu zvati [ti]" is more efficient (and more clear).

mu'o

 

  I mean INefficient way, sorry!

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners?hl=en.