[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lojban-beginners] Interaction of {na} and {su'o}
- To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
- Subject: [lojban-beginners] Interaction of {na} and {su'o}
- From: "Philip Newton" <philip.newton@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 20:16:10 +0100
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=WdOTVC/SiyPLAZVbvUNuzES++O0x7ma4y8ItAKwL1aE6Nz13iv2lPDE6ZI5mMysoWsHobfRKrofqN+zI7ipjq6n66De8JP6kR4NcvudpT6FHeAK+virXFY95NWGIxq/GFoNoo5fxVUqwEVhD2FTEK6ATS7mBV7kQRR5K8VbUvqs=
- Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
- Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
A sentence on jsk ( http://www.teddyb.org/jsk/showpost.php?post=565 ),
"Every pig is an animal, but not every animal is a pig", has the
proposed translation {.i ro xarju cu danlu .i ku'i su'o danlu na
xarju}.
That made me think, since I'm not really clear about how {na}
interacts with things.
My feeling, though, is that {su'o danlu na xarju} is the same as {naku
su'o danku cu xarju} and/or {naku zo'u su'o danku cu xarju}, which
would mean "It is not the fact that: at least one animal is a pig",
which is obviously false.
Would that mean that {ro danlu na xarju} and/or {naku ro danlu cu
xarju} and/or {naku zo'u ro danlu cu xarju} would be better? Or would
it have to be something like {naku zo'u da poi danlu zo'u da xarju}?
What about {su'o danlu cu na'e xarju}?
mu'o mi'e .filip.
--
Philip Newton <philip.newton@gmail.com>