From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sun Mar 18 16:12:15 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 19 Mar 2001 00:12:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 62789 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2001 00:12:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Mar 2001 00:12:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.191) by mta2 with SMTP; 19 Mar 2001 00:12:14 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 18 Mar 2001 16:12:14 -0800 Received: from 200.41.210.17 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Mon, 19 Mar 2001 00:12:11 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.41.210.17] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Random lojban questions/annoyances. Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 00:12:11 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Mar 2001 00:12:14.0722 (UTC) FILETIME=[405A2E20:01C0B009] From: "Jorge Llambias" la camgusmis cusku di'e > djuno jun ju'o know > x1 knows fact(s) x2 (du'u) about subject x3 by > epistemology x4 > >Now, since this is, as far as I am aware, the only official definition, we >need >to use and english dictionary for 'knows': Not really, but consulting dictionaries can certainly help sometimes. >1a (1): to perceive directly: have direct cognition of >1a (2): to have understanding of >1a (3): to recognize the nature of: DISCERN These would rarely be {djuno} in Lojban. {lifri} or {jimpe} seem more appropriate. >1b (1): to recognize as being the same as something previously known >1b (2): to be acquainted or familiar with >1b (3): to have experience of These are definitely not {djuno} but {se slabu}. >2a: to be aware of the truth or factuality of: be convinced or certain > of Yes, this one is Lojban {djuno}. >2b: to have a practical understanding of {kakne}, {certu}, {stati}. >3 archaic: to have sexual intercourse with {gletu}. >~ vi >1: to have knowledge This one can be {djuno}. >2: to be or become cognizant More like {sanji}. >The only place where truth is discussed is 2a, where _Webster's_, for >crying >out loud, states that "to be aware of the truth or factuality of" _is_ >_equivalent_ _to_ "be convinced or certain of". Dictionaries don't work like that, it doesn't state that they are equivalent. We know that they are not equivalent because "John is absloutely convinced that Robin lives in Australia" works where "John knows that Robin lives in Australia" doesn't. >.o'onai > >If y'all are going to insist that djuno makes a distinction between "to be >aware of the truth or factuality of" and "be convinced or certain of", >you're going to need to rewrite the definiton, because that is _not_ >what the current definition says. Actually Lojbab argued more or less what you are arguing the last time this was discussed. Who knows, maybe Lojban usage will depart from English usage in this regard and settle on your preferred definition. co'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.