Re: [lojban] non-ka properties

[Felipe Gonçalves Assis <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>]

2011/6/22 Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>
>
> 2011/6/22 Felipe Gonçalves Assis <felipeg.assis@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Stating a {ckaji} is just an indirect way to state the bridi obtained
> > by applying the predicate to the x1.
>
> Yes.
>
> But just as "kau" makes sense outside of a subordinate bridi, it can
> also make sense in these properties whose only purpose is to allow the
> raising of one of the arguments.
>

Could you point me where this general meaning of {kau} is explained?

Anyway, I guess {kau} is just not what we were looking for. You understand
what things I am trying to express, right? They are just functions, so that
I can use {zmadu} to say "f(x) > f(y)", {jibni} to say "f(x) is close to f(y)"
and {traji} to say "f, restricted to X, has maximal/minimal value at x". I am
just asking how to express f in lojban.

I really feel that this was the spirit in which these gismu were defined.
You talk about complex objects, and compare them with functions with
simpler, structured codomains.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.