⟨jai'a⟩ and ⟨nai'a⟩

From Lojban
Revision as of 08:10, 1 July 2018 by Gleki (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
  • I've been looking for ways to say these without using experimental cmavo. But in the meantime these provide a stopgap.
p FALSE SORTA TRUE
na p TRUE SORTA FALSE
ja'a p FALSE SORTA TRUE
nai'a p TRUE FALSE FALSE
jai'a p FALSE FALSE TRUE
    • And:
      la xorxes has suggested that, following the pattern of JAhA + CAI, the paradigm should be completed thus:
p FALSE SORTA TRUE
na cu'i p = ja'a cu'i p FALSE TRUE FALSE
  • These are operators, functions from truth values to truth values: they read more or less like this (being placed before the core bridi):
na it is not the case that
ja'a it is the case that
na'a it is false that
jai'a it is true that
nacu'i it is indeterminate that
    • Missing from this is it is sorta the case that: SORTA TRUE SORTA (or FALSE TRUE SORTA).
      • And:
        I didn't propose those because I can't get my head round the difference from F-T-F. A full series of operators are proposed under three-value logic (though it is incompatible with the JAhA + CAI proposal assumed by the proposal above). But the ones on this page are the ones I personally would find usable and useful.