On Wednesday, December 5, 2012 7:50:20 PM UTC+4, aionys wrote:
It took me a bit of searching to find this, but I did manage to find a discussion that corroborates my statement. The following post is by .xorxes.:
Subject: [lojban-beginners] How versatile is "nu"?
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Jorge Llambías <jjlla...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 9:52 AM, tijlan <
jbot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Officially, the most generic/nonspecific of
NU is "su'u"; but people
> seem to use "
nu" more often for the purpose of general
abstraction.
"abstractors" instead of something more acurate like "subordinators".
What NU does is take a bridi and convert it into a selbri, so that it
will not be used as the main proposition but as a subordinate one.
It's true that properties and propositions are abstract objects (as
are numbers), but for me there is nothing abstract about events.
Something that can be seen cannot be very abstract.
As for "su'u" as general subordinator, it was never used that way,
whatever its definition says. We can only speculate as to the reasons.
One reason could be that Loglan had the equivalents of nu/ka/ni but
nothing like "su'u", and people just went on with that. Also, "nu" and
"ka" being just one syllable, and with such distinct functions, there
wasn't much incentive to merge them. CLL lists "su'u" among the "minor
abstraction types", which already suggests it was never thought of as
the "general abstractor".
> Personally, I wouldn't find it particularly odd if someone use "nu"
> for a terbri which the gimste defines as "du'u" or other specific
> types of abstraction. For example:
>
> mi jinvi lo du'u broda (I think that the proposition "broda" is true)
> mi jinvi lo nu broda (I think that the event "broda" is true)
>
> "jinvi"s x2 is officially to take "du'u". Is "nu" for such objects of
> mental activity / logical operation discouraged? If so, why?
I suppose it's mainly tradition. One subordinator would probably be
all that is needed, but the nu/ka/du'u split is very entrenched. "ka"
is used for incomplete propositions, where you need to keep one (and
in a couple of cases more than one) argument slot open. "du'u" is used
mainly with propositional attitude predicates. It's a relatively short
list, maybe twenty or so gismu. In most other cases you can use "nu".
Notice that the choice between nu/ka/du'u is dictated by the outer
bridi, the one that contains this one as an argument, whereas the
choice between the four types of nu: za'i/pu'u/zu'o/mu'e is dictated
by the subordinate bridi itself.
This part makes perfect sense.
du'u/nu distinction is dictated by the outer bridi.
But za'i/pu'u/zu'o/mu'e distinction can be achieved using other methods inside the inner bridi
(e.g. {mu'e = nu co'i} as tsani said in one of his audio lessons).
This completely ruins the idea of the necessity of du'u/nu distinction (after all many languages including even guaspi don't have such distinction).
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Jonathan Jones
<eye...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 7:13 AM, selpa'i
<m...@plasmatix.com> wrote:
la'o gy. Jonathan Jones .gy cu cusku di'e
Hey, I'm just telling you how it is. I'm not saying that {nu} should be
the default, it just happens to be that it IS.
No, it's not. You're wrong. Why can't you accept that even after several people have shown you that you're wrong? You're providing the beginners that this list is dedicated to with misinformation.
{nu} is not the default, so it's *not* always right. You can't djuno a nu, nor can you zenba a nu.
As I said, I'm not saying that I agree with it, nor am I saying I think it's correct. What I AM saying is that that is how it is, regardless of whether it makes sense, regardless of what the definitions of the various NU are, and regardless of whether it should be something else.
That said, I do happen to agree with you. That, however, is not my point. This is not my opinion, it is the current state of the language. And I am not the first nor the last to find things about this language that could - or indeed, should- be changed for the better.
mu'o mi'e la selpa'i
--
pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo je nai zo lejbo
doị mèlbi mlenì'u
.i do càtlu ki'u
ma fe la xàmpre ŭu
.i do tìnsa càrmi
gi je sìrji se tàrmi
.i taị bo da'i pu cìtka lo gràna ku
.
--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.
.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
--
mu'o mi'e .aionys.
.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D )
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/0DofaH09d9AJ.