Re: zo djuno ce zo jetyju'o

[Lin Zhe Min <ljm@LJM.WOWNET.NET>]

On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Logical Language Group wrote:

...
> >note that even the gismu that seem straightforward, e.g. djuno, can
> >turn out not to be.
...
> I cannot imagine any gismu LESS straightforward than djuno, given that it
...

I don't understand how native English speaker 'consider' this word.
But when translating to Chinese, [djuno] is mapped to 'zhidao' (and 'zhi'
is its root word and its ancient form.) BTW, how to translate it to
French? Considerer, connantre, or savoir ? It is considerable that this
will turn out to be very philosophical, because we don't have (and we
cannot, or we should not, assign one philosophical definition in lojban)
a worldwide admittable definition to this word.

And when Ken Shan first learned this language, he showed me one phrase
as:
        mi na djuno la lojban.
Well, I don't know how do English speaker EXACTLY destruct this phrase.
But to me, as I can speak English, it seemed that he wantted to
express
        I don't know lojban. (1)
        I don't understand well lojban. (2), or furthermore,
        I cannot speak lojban. (3)
But to a native Chinese speaker (i.e., if he doesn't speak English),
this is simply to be
        I don't know what lojban is. (4)
        (wo3 bu4 zhi1 dao4 lojban shi4 she me.)

Interestedly, if you tell someone (3) in modern Chinese who lived in
Taiwan, people will (almost always) ask you 'When you listen to someone
who speaks lojban, can you understand?' (ni3 hui4 bu2 hui4 ting1 ?)

I believe that (4)'s French counterpart, which is like its Chinese
counterpart, but not equal to it, is to be
        Je ne sais pas la langue logicale. (5)
(v.s.)  Je ne sais pas le frangais.
which in my consideration is to express 'I don't know lojban, even one
simple word.' But when (5) is translated to Chinese, it is to be
        wo3 bu2 hui4 (jiang3) lojban.
And
        Je ne connais pas la langue logicale.
is to be transtated to
        wo3 bu4 dong3 lojban. (I don't understand this language, lojban.)

Interesting, eh? Well, I just like [djuno] to be simply mapped to 'zhi1
dao4'. Because almost every meanings of [djuno] (in many languages) are
contained in Chinese 'zhi1', the ancient form of 'zhi1 dao4'. Though it's
meaning today is purified, when you are expressing one thing
philosophically or you want to define something philosophically exactly,
people will always consider (and will ask you to define [djuno], 'zhi1
dao4') the differences.

Why? When you say
        mi na djuno zo djan.
        (or, mi na djuno le cmene la djan. le'o)
It is probably in English
        I don't know this person John.
        (I don't know the one who called John)
And it is always 'ren4 shi4' (to know someone, or in a philosophical
lexic, to consider some existence),
        wo3 bu2 ren4 shi4 John.
which is presented in French, more exactly than in English,
        Je ne connais pas John.
        (Je ne connais pas ce qui est appeli John.)

And how can I KNOW the word KNOW contains to many meanings? My English
teacher teached every student carefully each meaning of 'know' in English
when we were learning the language. However, to a 'pure' (i.e., native
speaker. We never hate other races.) Chinese, he will NEVER understand
        mi na djuno zo djan.
It sounds bizzare. But if someone tell him,
        mi na djuno le plice
("Aha! You even don't know what is an apple!", will he think.)
        .i mi na djuno la lojban.
("Well, ... euh... lojban is a artificial language first developped in
 the U.S. and it means 'the logical language'", will he tell that person.)
        .i mi na djuno zo djan.
("..?????... Oh! I see. You don't know who John is. Well, he is an
 American (sorry to those who live in Latin America. I can find NO
 simple word in English which means 'the one who has an U.S. nationality')
 who lives in the street", will he tell.)

Ah.... May I ask, Bob, in the text book (those in .doc format), it
indicated [merco] to be American. Does it mean 'those who have U.S.
nationalities' or 'those who lives in the continent America, whether
in north or south or in the Calebian sea or Indice ils.?

.e'osai ko sarji la lojban.     ==> =P$d+yE^?h;y(%!C
.co'o mi'e lindjy,min.          ==> &A(#!A'Z,O*L-u%A!C