From araizen@newmail.net Mon Aug 27 08:01:39 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: araizen@newmail.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2); 27 Aug 2001 15:01:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 15138 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2001 14:49:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 27 Aug 2001 14:49:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO out.newmail.net) (212.150.54.158) by mta1 with SMTP; 27 Aug 2001 14:49:55 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer ([62.0.180.11]) by out.newmail.net ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:50:53 +0200 Message-ID: <06ce01c12f10$10dd3800$87b4003e@oemcomputer> To: References: Subject: Re: [lojban] ce'u Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:34:19 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 From: "Adam Raizen" la and. cusku di'e > #The ones that fasnu in the contextually-established realworld spacetime > #are a ca'a fasnu, a ca'a gerku, and a ca'a prenu. The ones that merely > #zasti in the noosphere are a ka'e fasnu, a ka'e gerku and a ka'e > #prenu. > > Assuming, counterfactually, that I am happy to buy this, what is the > difference between ka'e nu and ca'a nu? If you (and others) agree that > it's exactly parallel to the difference between ka'e fasnu and ca'a fasnu > and ka'e gerku and ca'a gerku, then I think I'll be satisfied... Okay, I'll agree to that. A "ka'e nu" is a mental construct whereas a "ca'a nu" actually occurs. Then when we say "le nu", we mean "le ka'e nu" (at least when it is plausible, as in "le [ka'e] nu broda cu nibli le [ka'e] nu brode"). This doesn't mean, however, that every "ka'ejenaica'a broda" exists only in the noosphere, just that its broda-ness exists only in the noosphere. We can extend this to other abstractors: a "ka'e ka" isn't necessarily manifested; a "ca'a ka" is manifested and is a "ca'a se ckaji". a "ka'e du'u" isn't necessarily true; a "ca'a du'u" is true and is a "ca'a fatci". Maybe x2 of ka will work after all. mu'o mi'e .adam