Re: What the *%$@ does "nu" mean?

[And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>]

Jorge:
> >What are the truth conditions on {da du`u/nu broda} and
> >{da na du`u/nu broda}?
>
> {da du'u broda} is trivially true, for any broda. It is like
> saying {da namcu}.

Good. And likewise {da na du`u broda} is trivially false.

> {da nu broda} requires a context to evaluate.

You and I think this but John doesn't.

> >Do all nu exist in space-time? (If No, then: Do all xlura, all
> >prenu, all pavyseljerna?)
>
> [pavyseljirna]
>
> Yes, and yes, yes, yes.

ditto

> >Anyway, I am totally and utterly clueless about what you think
> >the meanings of nu and certain other NUs are. Either their
> >meanings are really undefined (i.e. not yet defined) or they
> >are defined but whoever knows the definition has utterly
> >failed to communicate that knowledge to me or to anyone else
> >who is able or willing to contribute to this discussion.
>
> I think they have been defined, more than once and with
> incompatible definitions, and not always clearly. Probably now it
> is up to the users to reach a consensus on one of the definitions.
> Whether we will or not is yet to be seen. I think I'm more or
> less clear on how I understand {du'u}, {ka} and {nu}.

I'm pretty clear on how you understand them too, and I favour
your understanding over others' contrary ones. However, I
know from experience that establishing orthodoxy requires
a greater consensus than just you & me.

Usage itself does not yet count for much, since we all pretty
much use Lojban as L2 learners, so Lojban is not defined by
current usage (except for lujvo). Rather, we still "discover"
it through debate.

--And