lojbo jufsisku
Lojban sentence search

Total: 39 result(s)
lujvo x1 (event/state) logically necessitates/entails/implies the negation of x2 (event/state), under rules/logic system x3. x1 prevents x2. to'e nibli. “lo nu broda cu tolni'i lo nu brode” has the same meaning as “lo nu broda cu nibli lo nu na brode”.
fu'ivla x1 is/are the thing(s) described/named with property x2 by the speaker, who thinks this is contextually enough information for the listener to understand what are x1's referent(s) This predicate is intended to be the predicate equivalent of le (or at least to one of the interpretations thereof), so that «lo le'elkai be lo ka broda» is equivalent to «le broda». See also le, lemkai.
lujvo x1=m1=g1=xl3 is an inappropriate anglicism made by x2=xl2, inappropriate according to x3=m3 Refers to any kind of inappropriate reliance upon English in a Lojban (or non-English language) expression, but is most common for calques. Is sometimes even extended to cover reliance upon cultural assumptions. This lujvo is made to have more-specific rafsi-connotations than the historical lujvo-term "malglico" (under malgli), and to avoid possible clashing with the common lujvo construction of "malbroda" meaning "d**ned broda / broda in a bad way". The xl2 place is also useful, allowing (mi se malglixlu) and (di'u malglixlu mi)
experimental cmavo argument list separator: acts as a comma between arguments in an argument list supplied to a function. "ce'oi" is the word of choice to separate the arguments in bridi3. Using ce'o there has obvious limitations when the selbri actually calls for a sequence. Obviously, ce'oi has issues too if the selbri can accept an argument list, but this can be circumvented more readily with ke...ke'e brackets than it can with ce'o. Consider ".i lo ka broda cu selbri fi ko'a ce'o ko'e". Without inspecting the type requirements of broda and the respective types of ko'a and ko'e, one cannot determine the meaning of the bridi. Furthermore, if one accepts non-static typing of sumti places, multiple correct answers can be given for a question asking what is the bridi1. This would create ambiguity that is otherwise resolved by "ce'oi". See also ka, du'u, me'au
experimental cmavo metasyntactic variable prenex Explicitly marks variables, e.g. ko'a ko'e, lerfu-strings, and/or brodV (must be converted into sumti using me'ei) as being metasyntactic: i.e. having no specific meaning or referent and merely used to demonstrate syntax or hypothetical scenarios. Automatically unassigns these variables from any previous assignment. e.g. (me'ei broda me'ei brode ko'a ko'e fo'a fo'e ge'ai). See ge'ei, ce'ai, ke'au, zo'u, da'o
experimental cmavo metasyntactic variable marker Explicitly marks the preceding variable, e.g. ko'a ko'e, lerfu-strings, and/or broda series as being metasyntactic: i.e. having no specific meaning or referent and merely used to demonstrate syntax or hypothetical scenarios. Automatically unassigns the variable from any previous assignment. May also be used for pronouns like mi or do or dei. This is useful to refer to mi as a 'first-person pronoun' rather than the actual speaker themself, for example, when giving the definition of mi'o: 'mi ge'ei jo'u do ge'ei', makes it clear that the speaker doesn't literally mean the speaker and the listener, but are using mi and do metasyntactically. Similarly, one might define mi as 'lo cusku be dei ge'ei'. See ge'ai, da'o
experimental cmavo begin quote that is converted into rafsi Terminated by zei'oi. Quotes an utterance (must be grammatical) and converts it (as a whole) into a single rafsi with the meaning of "something to do with the referent of "[insert quoted text]"". Notably, does not distribute through the text, treating each word individually with left-grouping (it does not distribute zei before and/or after each word (as needed)); the quoted utterance is taken as a whole unit of meaning unto itself; for the former purpose, see zei'ei'au. This word is useful for forming quotes and mathematical expressions (formal, evaluated, or otherwise) into lujvo. This rafsi is assumed to begin the next word if the preceding text/utterance does not end with an otherwise standalone and ungrammatical rafsi (the grammar in such a situation should be discussed); in order to connect it as a rafsi within a lujvo that began before it, precede the quotation with zei. In order to finish a lujvo or treat the quotation as a brivla on its own, follow it with co'e, which is treated as if the preceding utterance (the quote) is a single word followed immediately by zei; in order to string multiple ZEIhEI-ZEIhOI rafsi together follow this formula: zei'ei broda zei'oi co'e zei zei'ei brode zei'oi (co'e (zei...))... . Individual rafsi outside of lujvo are typically not grammatical (except in certain quotation structures, vel sim.).