2010/5/7 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:(BTW, it should be "gaurju'o")
> 2010/5/7 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>
>>
>> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > May I suggest a lujvo involving gasnu?
>> > gasnu gau "do" "x1 [person/agent] is an agentive cause of event x2; *x1
>> > does/brings about x2*"
>> >
>> > For example:
>> > gauju'o - g1=d1 knows how to bring about g2=d2
>>
>> You could do that, but it would be a non-compositional lujvo. You
>> cannot explain the meaning of that "gauju'o" in terms of "djuno", you
>> have to rely on the English gloss. It does not mean "ko'a djuno lo
>> du'u ko'a gasnu ko'e" or anything like that.
>>
> I wouldn't be trying to explain gauju'o in terms of djuno. I would explain
> it in terms of gasnu.
OK, what would the explanation be (in Lojban)? And why would you use
"djuno" as part of the lujvo if it plays no role in explaining the
meaning of the lujvo?
Attempting this, I find I can only do this using gasnu, djuno, and tadji, using djuno as the main bridi: {ko'a djuno lodu'u tadji be lonu ko'e se gasnu}
Also, I realized that, once again, I did the lujvo backwards. I should've said {jungau}. Interestingly, jbofi'e returns this for {jungau}:
"[1(2[jungau1 (inform) :] zo'e unspecif it)2 [is, does] «3jungau inform»3 (4[jungau2 (know-er(s)) :] zo'e unspecif it)4 (5[jungau3 (fact(s) known) :] zo'e unspecif it)5 (6[jungau4 (known subject(s)) :] zo'e unspecif it)6 (7[jungau5 (epistemology for knowing(s)) :] zo'e unspecif it)7]1"
Which doesn't really make any sense to me. x2-x5 just {djuno}'s place structure moved one step down, and I have no idea what the x1 is.
What would {ko'a jungau ko'e ko'i ko'o ko'u} be in English?