Re: knowledge and belief

["Jorge J. Llambías" <jorge@INTERMEDIA.COM.AR>]

la stivn cusku di'e

><.i mi djuno le du'u la xorxes kau pu porpi le rulja'o>
>"I know that it was Jorge who broke the vase."

I think you mean {porpygau}. Otherwise you're saying
that I broke into a vase.

>those who know me know that what I mean is:
>
><.i mi ja'a pa djuno le du'u la xorxes kau porpi le rulja'o>
>"I fuzzily know that it was Jorge who broke the vase."

That should be {ja'a xi pa}. Otherwise {pa djuno} is the sumti
"one knower".

 >Perhaps if I was on a jury, I might say:
>
><.i mi ja'a pa djuno le du'u la xorxes kau porpi le rulja'o kei fo racli
senpi>
>"I fuzzily know beyond a reasonable doubt that Jorges broke the vase."

You need a sumti after {fo}. If events can be epistemologies, then that
would be {le nu racli senpi}. But wouldn't it be better to know by {le nu
racli birti} = "being rationally certain", rather than by rationally
doubting?

co'o mi'e xorxes