Talk:Tiki forum archive/Forum 5/8813
Source: 2013 Tiki forum 5, thread #8813. Original authors, UTC times, post IDs, and reply-parent IDs are preserved. This is an archive, not an active article discussion.
Logical connectives
Logical connectives
remod · 2009-12-03 12:56 UTC · Tiki post #8813
actually would have more but I'll save the others for another time :) ).
Is it correct to say that when using logical connectives like in: {mi cutka ti .a ta} , {ti .a ta} is a single sumti?
Also, if I had abstractions {le nu ... kei .e le nu ... kei .e le nu ... kei} are the {kei} elidable?
remod.
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [email protected]
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
Logical connectives
lukebergen · 2009-12-03 12:56 UTC · Tiki post #8814 · reply to Tiki post #8813
I'm not sure what you mean by {cutka} but yes {ti .a ta} is a single sumti
I don't think they {kei} are elidable since you could say something like {mi gleki le nu mi citka lo plise [kei1] .e lo perli [kei2]} depending on which of those {kei} I choose to use I may be saying "I am happy about eating apples ... and something to do with a pear" or I might be saying "I am happy about eating apples and pears". So I don't think {kei} is elidable in this situation. But I could be wrong, the default may be the [kei2] in which case it's elidable if you really intend {lo perli} to be inside the abstraction with {lo plise}.
Does that sound about right?
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Remo Dentato <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi there, I've a couple of questions on logical connectives (well, I > actually would have more but I'll save the others for another time :) > ). > > Is it correct to say that when using logical connectives like in: {mi > cutka ti .a ta} , {ti .a ta} is a single sumti? > > Also, if I had abstractions {le nu ... kei .e le nu ... kei .e le nu > ... kei} are the {kei} elidable? > > > remod. > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [email protected] > with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if > you're really stuck, send mail to [email protected] for help. >
>Logical connectives
Jorge Llambías <[email protected]> · 2009-12-03 12:56 UTC · Tiki post #8815 · reply to Tiki post #8813
> > Is it correct to say that when using logical connectives like in: {mi > cutka ti .a ta} , {ti .a ta} is a single sumti?
>From a grammatical (syntactical) point of view, the connected construction functions as a single sumti, yes.
>From a logical point of view, they are two sumti. "mi citka ti .a ta" is logically equivalent to "mi citka ti .ija mi citka ta". This differs from the "non-logical" sumti connectives, for which the syntax does match the logical structure.
> Also, if I had abstractions {le nu ... kei .e le nu ... kei .e le nu > ... kei} are the {kei} elidable?
It depends on what the "..." is. Sometimes kei will be elidable, sometimes not.
mu'o mi'e xorxes
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [email protected]
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
Logical connectives
remod · 2009-12-03 12:56 UTC · Tiki post #8816 · reply to Tiki post #8813
I think I understand a little bit more.
To try learning lojban I'm translating a book.
I'm sure I will never finish the translation, but I hope I'll learn something by trying.
remod.
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [email protected]
with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if
Logical connectives
seryf · 2009-12-03 12:56 UTC · Tiki post #8825 · reply to Tiki post #8813
Logical connectives
remod · 2009-12-03 12:56 UTC · Tiki post #8826 · reply to Tiki post #8813
http://code.google.com/p/c-libutl/wiki/binxo_budas
On Sep 11, 2009 9:58pm, Seth [email protected]> wrote:
> what are you translating?
