Re: x4 of djuno (was: Re: Summary so far on DJUNO)

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

Lojbab:
> >>From where I am standing, it looks as if Jorge, & I, and John,
> >and others think that, in accordance with the baseline, "djuno"
> >means "know". You, on the other hand, have sought to persuade us
> >that, contrary to the baseline, it means "be convinced that".
>
> I'm sorry, but the baselining does not affect this issue.  The baselining
> froze the keywords - which have many times been stated NOT to be exact
> synonyms, and the place structures, however loosely defined.  Thus far,
> all of these things are only stated in English language terms, but I should
 hope that we have made it quite clear that the use of English words in writing
> the definitions is NOT intended to force all the semantic implications of
> trhose English words onto the Lojban.  The word djuno approximates the
> meaning of English "know" compounded by the requirement for certain
> additional relationships (a thing known, a subject, and an epistemology)
> to also be present.

I accept all this. However, if we find that there is a candidate
meaning for "djuno" which is compatible with (a) the keyword,
(b) the place structure, (d) usage, and (e) the necessity for
the meaning to differ from other gismu's, then I think this
automatically beats a candidate meaning that fails to satisfy
criteria (a) or (d).

> equally significant is the absence of a place relating to
> a speaker - hence my claim that the speaker's recognition of the knowledge
> as truth is NOT significant, whether it be so for English "know" (and I think
> there has been some evidence that even for English that claim is only
> fuzzily true).

Why should "djuno" have a speaker place? Pinxe lacks one, yet
the speaker is claiming that x2 of pinxe is liquid, just as
with djuno the speaker is claiming that x2 is true.

--And