⟨jai'a⟩ and ⟨nai'a⟩: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mNo edit summary |
m (Gleki moved page jbocre: jai'a And nai'a to jai'a And nai'a without leaving a redirect: Text replace - "jbocre: ([a-z])" to "$1") |
Revision as of 14:44, 23 March 2014
I've been looking for ways to say these without using experimental cmavo. But in the meantime these provide a stopgap.
p FALSE SORTA TRUE
na p TRUE SORTA FALSE
ja'a p FALSE SORTA TRUE
nai'a p TRUE FALSE FALSE
jai'a p FALSE FALSE TRUE
xorxes has suggested that, following the pattern of JAhA + CAI, the paradigm should be completed thus:
p FALSE SORTA TRUE
na cu'i p = ja'a cu'i p FALSE TRUE FALSE
These are operators, functions from truth values to truth values: they read more or less like this (being placed before the core bridi):
- na
- it is not the case that
- ja'a
- it is the case that
- na'a
- it is false that
- jai'a
- it is true that
- nacu'i
- it is indeterminate that
Missing from this is "it is sorta the case that": SORTA TRUE SORTA (or FALSE TRUE SORTA).
- I didn't propose those because I can't get my head round the difference from F-T-F. A full series of operators are proposed under Three-value Logic (though it is incompatible with the JAhA + CAI proposal assumed by the proposal above). But the ones on this page are the ones I personally would find usable and useful. --And Rosta