From arntrich@stud.ntnu.no Wed Oct 11 03:49:13 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: arntrich@stud.ntnu.no X-Apparently-To: lojban@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_1_0); 11 Oct 2000 10:49:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 31638 invoked from network); 11 Oct 2000 10:49:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 11 Oct 2000 10:49:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO elefant.stud.ntnu.no) (129.241.56.22) by mta1 with SMTP; 11 Oct 2000 10:49:12 -0000 Received: from s1034912.stud.svt.ntnu.no (dhcp-73110.stud.svt.ntnu.no [129.241.73.110]) by elefant.stud.ntnu.no (8.10.0.Beta12/8.10.0.Beta12) with SMTP id e9BAnAk07717 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:49:10 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20001011101922.00847780@pop.stud.ntnu.no> X-Sender: arntrich@pop.stud.ntnu.no (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:19:22 +0200 To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: na nei Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: Arnt Richard Johansen Is the sentence "na nei" an Epimenides paradox? At first glance, it seems to mean "this sentence is false". But, I remember reading somewhere in the grammar that double negatives don't cancel each other out - they reinforce each other. Is this correct? -- Arnt Richard Johansen | "We can speak all of your Earth languages! http://people.fix.no/arj/ | Well, except Esperanto, we could tell that one arj@fix.no | wasn't going anywhere..."