Re: Summary so far on DJUNO

[Goran Topic <amadan@USA.NET>]

Translation follows.

> >Anyway, more useful than changing the keyword is expanding the proper
> >definition with the place structure. E.g. if {djuno} still had
> >keyword "know" but was glossed as "x4 convinces x1 that x2 is true of
> >x3" [=your definition] then the misunderstanding probably wouldn't
> >have arisen.
>
> True, but I did not forsee this particular debate, and hence did not choose
 that
> wording.  And would not have because the standard for the gismu definitions is
> to choose wording that keep the elements in their Lojban order.  This
 sometimes
> leads to confusing English, but that's life.

.i xu de'u
.i ja'adi'u .inaja roda rode zo'u
ledu'u da birti de cu du ledu'u da djuno de le jai do'e de zo'e
.i ga'a mi la'ezo birti cu cmima la'ezo djuno
.i zo birti na plixau .i mi roroi lenu pu pilno zo birti ka'e pilno lu
djuno zo'e zo'e li'u
.i pe'ipei
no'i mi jimpe ledu'u zo djuno zo krici frica makau
.i tu'a zo birti cu cfipu mi

co'o mi'e. goran.

























Is it true? Because if it is, then "X birti Y" means the same as "X
djuno Y (about something in Y, by some epistemology)". AFAICS the
meaning of birti is a special case of djuno, and thus useless. For
anything I used birti I can use djuno with unspecified topic and
reasoning.
I understand why djuno and krici are different. birti continues to
confuse me.