Re: [lojban] Re: Archivist/Founders: {ri'a nai} vs. {se mau nai}

[Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 09:12:20AM -0800, Jorge Llamb?as wrote:
> 
> --- Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > Then we would have that:
> > 
> > {to'e ri'a} is "in opposition to (your asking)" 
> >
> > {no'e ri'a} is "in indifference to (your asking)"
> >
> > {na'e ri'a} == {ri'a nai} is "not because of (your asking)"
> >
> > {je'a ri'a} is "definately because of (your asking)"
> > 
> > Any objections?
> 
> How does {to'e rinka} become "in opposition to"? 

{to'e} is "opposite", and apparently I had that on the brain.  I was
just going for "despite".

> My first guess for {to'e rinka} would be {se rinka}, the opposite
> of the cause is the effect. 

That's net nearly as useful, of course.

> Saying that "despite" is the opposite of "because" is like saying
> that "all" is the opposite of "some", or that "and" is the
> opposite of "or", or that "must" is the opposite of "may". They
> are in some kind of opposition (they are duals) but I wouldn't use
> {to'e} for it. 

Do you have a better way to say "despite"?

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/
Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"
Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/