Re: whether (was Re: ni, jei, perfectionism)

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

>> To put ce'u in there
>> (unless I put it in all places) is to focus on a particular place as
>> significant to my apporval.  The statement is NOT that I approve of
>> the property of beautiful things or the property of people appreciating
>> beautiful things or the property of  aspects leading to appreciation of
>> beauty or the property of aesthetic standards being used for such recognitio
>> of beauty.
>
>Yes it is.
>
>> The statement is appreciation of Beauty, in all of its
>> ramifications
>
>No. That's not how Lojban ka abstractions work.

That is how I use them, and how they have been used since they started.
The ONLY way I can see to use ce'u is to put it in ALL the places.
My understanding is that ka without ce'u ispretty much equivalent to doing so,
but thatmay be because I do not understand ce'u, NOT because I don't understand
ka.

>I suggest:
>
>--More--
>  mi zanru le ka ce`u nu melbi
>
>for the meaning you want.

No.  having thought of it, I think the ce'u-in-all-places is more
valid, because I think of ka bridi as multi-aspectual.  What is not clear to
me is whether ce'u in all places is ENOUGH, or whether we need ce'u in all
places plus all possible tcita sumti.
> >> mi zanru le du'u melbi
>> >>
>> >> I approve of the fact that (something is) beautiful.
>> >
>> >No. "I approve of the proposition that something is beautiful".
>> >
>> >"the fact that" is better rendered by "le nu".
>>
>> I disagree, partly because I do not see any difference between the former
>> and the latter.
>
>Facts are true propositions. Propositions can be false. Facts
>can't.

It sounds like you are saying that we have another bloogy sumti raising here
and that nu is no better than du'u.  Are you saying that we need

mi zanru lenu ledu'u broda cu jetnu
or of course
mi zanru tu'a ledu'u broda
?

>x2 of djuno = fact = true proposition.
>du`u = proposition.

But then here it seems that you are saying that the x2 of djuno must
similarly be marked:

mi djuno lenu ledu'u broda cu jetnu

because you have said that a mere ledu'u is not a true proposition.
But then a lenu ledu'u is not a true porposition either.

If I approve of something, then I approve of it being a true proposition.
How does zanru differ from djuno?  If I know something, then I know
that it is a true proposition.

>> Disambiguation is not necessary to those of us who appreciate complexity %^)
>
>If all readings are equally relevant then the addressee may
>conclude that all readings are intended. That is, that the
>speaker is actually communicating several different bridi
>simultaneously with the one jufra.

No.  One bridi.

A complex bridi, to be sure, but using a  logical connective for example
can turn multiple bridi into one bridi.

Whne I use ka (without ce'u) I am focussing on relationships, not on things.
The properties (ka) of a proposition, are to me the relationships that make
the proposition meaningful.

lojbab
----
lojbab                                                lojbab@access.digex.net
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA                        703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: ftp.access.digex.net /pub/access/lojbab
    or see Lojban WWW Server: href="http://xiron.pc.helsinki.fi/lojban/";
    Order _The Complete Lojban Language_ - see our Web pages or ask me.