[lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: About the negators

[Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>]

On Friday 19 December 2008 14:15:27 Jorge Llambías wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Michael Turniansky
>
> <mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
> >  And there is for "na", too.  Like the first
> > transform of transforming it (if it's in a selbri) to "naku" at the start
> > of a prenex.
>
> Except when it isn't. When {na} is in a selbri, it can't always be
> moved to the start of a prenex. That's the problem with the special
> na-rule, it's complicated and ill defined.

How's this for a definition of the na-rule?:
1. Convert all conjunctions that connect two clauses (ijek) or bridi-tails 
(gihek) to forethought.
2. Move {na} which is not part of a conjunction as far as possible toward the 
beginning of the sentence without jumping over a conjunction that connects 
two clauses or bridi-tails, and replace it with {naku}.
e.g. su'oda na broda gi'e brode
->su'oda ge na broda gi brode
->su'oda ge naku broda gi brode

su'oda nage broda gi brode
doesn't change, because {na} is part of the conjunction {nage}.

Pierre


To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.