Chapter 5: “Pretty Little Girls' School”: The Structure Of Lojban selbri

12. Scalar negation of selbri

Negation is too large and complex a topic to explain fully in this chapter; see Chapter 15. In brief, there are two main types of negation in Lojban. This section is concerned with so-called “scalar negation”, which is used to state that a true relation between the sumti is something other than what the selbri specifies. Scalar negation is expressed by cmavo of selma'o NAhE:

✥12.1    la .alis. cu na'e ke cadzu klama [ke'e] le zarci
Alice non- (walkingly goes) to-the market.
Alice other-than (walkingly goes) to-the market.
Alice doesn't walk to the market.

meaning that Alice's relationship to the market is something other than that of walking there. But if the “ke” were omitted, the result would be:

✥12.2    la .alis. cu na'e cadzu klama le zarci
Alice non- walkingly goes to-the market.
Alice doesn't walk to the market.

meaning that Alice does go there in some way (“klama” is not negated), but by a means other than that of walking. ✥12.1 negates both “cadzu” and “klama”, suggesting that Alice's relation to the market is something different from walkingly-going; it might be walking without going, or going without walking, or neither.

Of course, any of the simple selbri types explained in c5-§9 may be used in place of brivla in any of these examples:

✥12.3    la djonz. cu na'e pamoi cusku
Jones is non-1st speaker
Jones is not the first speaker.

Since only “pamoi” is negated, an appropriate inference is that he is some other kind of speaker.

Here is an assortment of more complex examples showing the interaction of scalar negation with “bo” grouping, “ke” and “ke'e” grouping, logical connection, and sumti linked with “be” and “bei”:

✥12.4    mi na'e sutra cadzu be fi le birka be'o
    klama le zarci
I ((non-quickly) ( walking using the arms))
    go-to the market.
I go to the market, walking using my arms
    other than quickly.

In ✥12.4, “na'e” negates only “sutra”. Contrast ✥12.5:

✥12.5    mi na'e ke sutra cadzu be fi le birka [be'o] ke'e
    klama le zarci
I non- ( quickly (walking using the arms) )
    go-to the market.
I go to the market, other than by walking
    quickly on my arms.

Now consider ✥12.6 and ✥12.7, which are equivalent in meaning, but use “ke” grouping and “bo” grouping respectively:

✥12.6    mi sutra cadzu be fi le birka be'o je masno
    klama le zarci
I (quickly -- (walking using the arms) and slowly)
    go-to the market.
I go to the market, both quickly walking
    using my arms and slowly.

✥12.7 mi ke sutra cadzu be fi le birka [be'o] ke'e
    je masno klama le zarci
I ((quickly (walking using the arms))
    and slowly) go-to the market.
I go to the market, both quickly walking
    using my arms and slowly.

However, if we place a “na'e” at the beginning of the selbri in both ✥12.6 and ✥12.7, we get different results:

✥12.8    mi na'e sutra cadzu be fi le birka be'o
    je masno klama le zarci
I ((non- quickly) -- (walking using the arms)
    and slowly) go-to the market.
I go to the market, both walking using my arms
    other than quickly, and also slowly.

✥12.9 mi na'e ke sutra cadzu be fi le birka [be'o] ke'e
    je masno klama le zarci
I (non-(quickly (walking using the arms))
    and slowly) go-to the market.
I go to the market, both other than quickly
    walking using my arms, and also slowly.

The difference arises because the “na'e” in ✥12.9 negates the whole construction from “ke” to “ke'e”, whereas in ✥12.8 it negates “sutra” alone.

Beware of omitting terminators in these complex examples! If the explicit “ke'e” is left out in ✥12.9, it is transformed into:

✥12.10  mi na'e ke sutra cadzu be fi le birka be'o
    je masno klama [ke'e] le zarci
I non-(quickly ((walking using the arms))
    and slowly) go-to) the market.
I do something other than quickly both
    going to the market walking using my arms
    and slowly going to the market.

And if both “ke'e” and “be'o” are omitted, the results are even sillier:

✥12.11  mi na'e ke sutra cadzu be fi le birka
    je masno klama [be'o] [ke'e] le zarci
I non-(quickly walk on my (arm-type
    and slow) goers) on the market.
I do something other than quickly walking using the
    goers, both arm-type and slow, relative-to the market.

In ✥12.11, everything after “be” is a linked sumti, so the place structure is that of “cadzu”, whose x2 place is the surface walked upon. It is less than clear what an “arm-type goer” might be. Furthermore, since the x3 place has been occupied by the linked sumti, the “le zarci” following the selbri falls into the nonexistent x4 place of “cadzu”. As a result, the whole example, though grammatical, is complete nonsense. (The bracketed Lojban words appear where a fluent Lojbanist would understand them to be implied.)

Finally, it is also possible to place “na'e” before a “gu'e … gi” logically connected tanru construction. The meaning of this usage has not yet been firmly established.