BPFK Section: Logical Connectives

Proposed Tags

These are words that might be used pedagogically to mark these word types per link).

  • (sumti/bridi-tail/general) afterthought logical connective, which we're just calling ALC
    • We might want to come up with something better than "bridi-tail" there.
    • needs a Lojban equivalent?
    • some piece of documentation needs to specify what "general ALC" actually can connect
  • (tanru/general) forethought logical connective (FLC)
    • some piece of documentation needs to specify what "general FLC" actually can connect
    • needs a Lojban equivalent?




  • Should we do ijeks as well as jeks? That would simplify the jek definitions, but should we bother?
  • Unlimited forethought connection would be really nice. This would need a new cmavo something like {bei}, for all but the last connection. So {ge ko'a gi ko'e} is unchanged, but {ge ko'a gi'oi ko'e gi ko'i} means the same as {ko'a .e ko'e .e ko'i}. {gi} marks "this is the last branch of the next-outer-most FLC".
    • < ksion> Plus probably a terminator in case you forgot saying {gi} before the last argument. < ksion> (That's mostly for speech convienience though).
  • Since all LC are theoretically syntactic sugar for {.i JA}, how to GOhA interact with them?
    • Example: {ko'a brode gi'e broda} — what's {go'i} after that? {ko'a broda}? Or {ko'a brode gi'e broda} whatever that means as single bridi.
  • Also {vo'A}. What does {ko'a broda ko'e gi'e brode ko'i vo'e} mean? Does {vo'e} refer to {ko'e} or {ko'i}?
    • In most cases it probably should be "refers to the bridi it itself is embedded in".
  • What is the meaning of SE + logical connective, when the SE is something other than {se}?
  • There are gismu equivalents of A and E, but not O and U. This seems unfortunate. Does {nibli} count as an equiv of O?
  • Speaking of which, what do {kanxe} and {vlina} actually mean? Is {le kanxe be ko'a bei ko'e cu broda} semantically equivalent to {ko'a .e ko'e cu broda}? If not, what *is* it semantically equivalent to?
    • Yet another use/mention problem in the gismu. How many does that make?
    • ksion in #lojban suggests: {la'e lu ko'a broda .ije ko'a brode li'u cu kanxe lo du'u ko'a broda kei lo du'u ko'a brode}, which is horrible; I (camgusmis) would rather redefine than be stuck with shit like that.
    • {i lo du'u ge broda gi brode cu kanxe lo du'u broda kei lo du'u brode} from dbrock; same thing
  • xorxes had a proposal that replaces all the logical connectives with JA, which is rather impressive. See link)
  • All of the definitions need Lindar's touch - I mean, they need expanding into something more, um, conversational English. - .aionys., at prompting from arj.
  • Order of operations for multiple sumti connectives in a bridi needs to be resolved. Is {ko'a .a ko'e broda fo'a .e fo'e} the same as {ko'a broda fo'a .e fo'e .i ja ko'e broda fo'a .e fo'e} (LtR) or is it {ko'a .a ko'e broda fo'a .i je ko'a .a ko'e broda fo'e} (RtL, which would be unusual, or if "and" takes precedence over "or", as in many formal systems)?


The current definitions are expected to have no particular impact;
they should just clarify the current state.

Proposed Definitions and Examples

































Relevant prior discussions


Syntax link)

A parser bug that causes li revo .a li pare to not be recognized, because it needs LALR(2). link)

Unification of all logical connectives into selma'o JA.

Proposal? to allow FLC tanru conn inside of gadri. (this already seems to work by some parsers) link)

A proposal for a new “narrative connective”. link)

A proposal for adding GI+JOI as a gihek. link)

NUhU_gap as a cheat to avoid having more logical connectives. link)

Proposal: allow jeks wherever joiks are allowed link)

A Zipfean argument against making ji the tanru afterthought connective question link)

Inconsistent order of logical connectives with different types of tags link)

Inconsistency in the syntax of tanru-internal forethought logical connectives link)

A change proposal so that geks can be used in both bridi-tails and sentences.

Semantics link)

Whether or not jeks in tanru in description sumti can be expanded to eks between sumti. link)

What is the meaning of SE + logical connective, when the SE is something other than se? link)

All logical connectives expand to bridi logical connection. link)

On the relationship between logical connectives and quantifiers. link)

In tense constructs, what binds more tightly of connectives or modifiers? link)

How do logical connectives interact with intensional descriptions? link)

SE + logical connective, when the SE is something other than se, is nonsense link)

How do quantified tenses work when they tag a sumti with logical connectives? link)

How do logical connectives interact with intensional descriptions? link)

The use of da'i in hypothetical implications

Scope link)

Do variables scope over logical connectives? link)

How far does the scope of a prenex extend? link) link) link) link)

Imperative connectives. What is the Lojban translation of “Stop, or I'll shoot”? Do imperatives scope over ijeks? link)

zo'e doesn't preserve identity across logical connectives.

Distribution/expansion link)

Distribution of connectives in tanru link)

Distribution of sumti logical connectives link)

Distribution of tanru modification over logical connectives link)

Distribution of sumti logical connectives link)

Distributive or non-distributive grouping of tanru-internal logical connectives link)

Logical connectives can't expand out of abstractions, which are referentially opaque link)

Tense logical connection is expandable link)

What is the correct expansion of a bridi where multiple of the arguments have logical connectives?

Other Crap


General Notes


  • We need a way to easily say "would you like cream or sugar or a donut?" using ji or similar. I *think* this is straightforward, but this is a note to think about it.

There was a recent discussion(external link) of this that had people present their different solutions. There are two types: the one with {ji} and the ones with choice from a set.

do djica A ji B ji C ...
The helpful answers can all be covered with "(na).e(nai) .e(nai) ..."

A B zo'u do djica ma

do djica ma poi cmima A ce B ce C ce ...

do djica ma poi me A .a B .a C .a ...

The answers "A", "B", "C", ..., "A joi B", ... "noda", "roda". And if you want to be less than helpful: "pada", "su'oda", "me'ida", and so on.

  • How do you reply to {do djica lo ladru ji nai lo sakta} if you want both? Again, might be obvious/well understood, but could use checking.

According to xorxes and mark shoulson (in the thread linked above) the answer is .eja'ai, using {ja'ai} aka the cmavo affirmer.

  • what does {mi djica lo ladru .e nai lo sakta na .e lo titnanba} mean (double negative)?

Created by rlpowell. Last Modification: Thursday 21 of August, 2014 17:49:55 GMT by Ilmen.