PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS AN OLD VERSION. The current version is linked from The Complete Lojban Language.

9. Affirmations

There is an explicit positive form for both selma'o NA (``ja'a'') and selma'o NAhE (``je'a''), each of which would supplant the corresponding negator in the grammatical position used, allowing one to assert the positive in response to a negative question or statement without confusion. Assuming the same context as in Section 8:

9.1)  xu na go'i
    Is-it-true-that [false] [repeat previous]?
or equivalently
9.2)  xu la djan. [cu] na pu klama
        la paris. .e la rom.
    Is it true that: John [false] previously-went-to
        [both] Paris and Rome.]

The obvious, but incorrect, positive response to this negative question is:

9.3)  go'i
    [repeat previous]

A plain ``go'i'' does not mean ``Yes it is''; it merely abbreviates repeating the previous statement unmodified, including any negators present; and Example 9.3 actually states that it is false that John went to both Paris and Rome.

When considering:

9.4)  na go'i
    [false] [repeat previous]
as a response to a negative question like Example 9.2, Lojban designers had to choose between two equally plausible interpretations with opposite effects. Does Example 9.4 create a double negative in the sentence by adding a new ``na'' to the one already there (forming a double negative and hence a positive statement), or does the ``na'' replace the previous one, leaving the sentence unchanged?

It was decided that substitution, the latter alternative, is the preferable choice, since it is then clear whether we intend a positive or a negativ sentence without performing any manipulations. This is the way English usually works, but not all languages work this way --- Russian, Japanese, and Navajo all interpret a negative reply to a negative question as positive.

The positive assertion cmavo of selma'o NA can also replace the ``na'' in the context, giving:

9.5)  ja'a go'i
    (John truly-(previously went-to) [both] Paris and Rome.)
``ja'a'' can replace ``na'' in a similar manner wherever the latter is used:
9.6)  ja'a go'i
    John indeed previously went-to [both] Paris and Rome.
``je'a'' can replace ``na'e'' in exactly the same way, stating that scalar negation does not apply, and that the relation indeed holds as stated. In the absence of a negation context, it emphasizes the positive:
9.7)  ta je'a melbi
    that is-indeed beautiful.