From gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch Sat Oct 06 23:45:41 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 7 Oct 2001 06:43:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 5346 invoked from network); 7 Oct 2001 06:43:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by 10.1.1.221 with QMQP; 7 Oct 2001 06:43:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta9n.bluewin.ch) (195.186.1.215) by mta2 with SMTP; 7 Oct 2001 06:45:40 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (62.202.38.153) by mta9n.bluewin.ch (Bluewin AG 6.0.024) id 3BBD9103001516FF for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sun, 7 Oct 2001 08:45:09 +0200 Message-ID: <00b201c14efb$7592d740$ca34ca3e@oemcomputer> To: Subject: NU semantics Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 08:43:00 +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 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "G. Dyke" I've been wondering about the semantics of NU. The truth and amount abstractors are clear enough, so are those in the za'i series, but what is the difference between leka brode lenu brode leli'i brode lesi'o brode ledu'u brode a ka has to be supported by some nu for it to be true, this is also the case for the others. could these interpretations be possible? leka brode du lenu ka'e brode ledu'u brode du lenu ca'a brode lesi'o brode du lenu nu'o brode leli'i brode du lenu pu'i brode mi'e greg -- "I have a proposal for the international community: help us build an execution block ; then we will be able to use our stadium for playing football" *the afghani foreign minister*