Chapter 14: If Wishes Were Horses: The Lojban Connective System

19. Abstractor connection and connection within abstractions

Last and (as a matter of fact) least: a logical connective is allowed between abstraction markers of selma'o NU. As usual, the connection can be expanded to a bridi connection between two bridi which differ only in abstraction marker. Jeks are the appropriate connective. ✥19.1 and ✥19.2 are equivalent in meaning:

✥19.1    le ka la frank. ciska cu xlali
    .ije le ni la frank. ciska cu xlali
The quality-of Frank's writing is bad,
    and the quantity of Frank's writing is bad.

✥19.2 le ka je ni la frank. ciska cu xlali
The quality and quantity of Frank's writing is bad.

As with tenses and modals, there is no forethought and no way to override the left-grouping rule.

Logical connectives and abstraction are related in another way as well, though. Since an abstraction contains a bridi, the bridi may have a logical connection inside it. Is it legitimate to split the outer bridi into two, joined by the logical connection? Absolutely not. For example:

✥19.3    mi jinvi le du'u loi jmive cu zvati
    gi'onai na zvati vau la .iupiter.
I opine the fact-that a-mass-of living-things (is-at
    or-else isn't-at) Jupiter.
I believe there either is or isn't life on Jupiter.

is true, since the embedded sentence is a tautology, but:

✥19.4    mi jinvi le du'u loi jmive
    cu zvati la .iupiter.
.ijonai mi jinvi le du'u loi jmive
    cu zvati la .iupiter.
I opine the fact-that a-mass-of living-things
    is-at Jupiter
or-else I opine the fact-that a-mass-of living-things
    isn't-at Jupiter

is false, since I have no evidence one way or the other (“jinvi” requires some sort of evidence, real or fancied, unlike “krici”).