Chapter 14: If Wishes Were Horses: The Lojban Connective System
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”).