The terms are a little obscure. Cardinal numbers are what you'd consider "normal" numbers: "one", "two", "three", etc. They're used for the number of things in a collection. {mei} converts a number into a selbri that asserts that the cardinality (the number of elements) in its arguments (a mass, a set, and the elements themselves, in that order). So {le bende cu mu mei} is saying "the team has five members".

Ordinals are the numbers that indicate where in a sequence something is: "first", "second", "third", "last", etc. {moi} does a similar thing to {mei}, but it creates an ordinal selbri. That is, it tells you where in a particular sequence an element occurs.

http://jbotcan.org/cllc/c11/s7.html

"du'u" is an abstractor, which means that it takes an embedded bridi and then refers to something about that bridi. "nu" refers to the event of the bridi happening. "si'o" refers to an idea of the bridi as had by some thinker. "du'u" refers to the very fact of the bridi, the fact that (such and such).

lo nu mi klama le zarci [kei] [ku] = an event of "i go to the store"... lo nu mi klama le zarci cu fasnu (i go to the store is a fasnu, it happens.. it's an event)

lo si'o mi klama le zarci [kei] [ku] = an idea of "i go to the store".. mi te sidbo fi lo si'o mi klama le zarci (i have an idea of me going to the store)

lo du'u mi klama le zarci [kei] [ku] = the very fact that i go to the store.. xu do krici lo du'u mi klama le zarci (do you believe the fact "i go to the market"?) .i mi djuno lo du'u zo du'u cu cinri (i know the fact that "the word du'u is interesting")

Most gismu about believing or knowing or whatever will have a "du'u" place. If you know that I went to the store, you don't actually know the event itself of me going to the store. You don't know the idea of me going, either, you think the idea of me going. What you do to my going is to know the fact of it, the du'u of it.

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.

It's fairly untranslatable because it's both a question and an imperative command. I think it is generally assumed to mean that in response one performs an action and then describes it.

>>580 I was always imagined a mother who realizes that her son has again ignored her command. "What have I said you to do?", said she, assuming not only the son will answer the question, but also he'll comply at last.

Be prepared to facepalm:

historical reasons.

http://jbotcan.org/cllc/c14/s3.html

oh man, we should have avoided the legacy of lohglan and start fresh with completely new words for concepts and word classes, so we won't be restrained in our thoughts and conquer the universe at the speed of light!

now it's all for naught :(

{lo'u .. le'u} quotes Lojban words that may or may not be grammatical. As I have observed it used, it is used to quote partial and incomplete sentences, or when in doubt about the grammatical validity of an utterance.

"nau" is for the here&now of the speaker.

"ca" is what you want for the "now" that means "then", "at that time". You can use it as a sumti tcita to give more precision: "ca la'e di'u", "at the same time that happened", or "ca lo nu go'i".

la .brutus. cu jdice lo du'u catra la .kaisar.
la .brutus. ca jdice lo du'u catra la .kaisar.
la .brutus. ca la'e di'u cu jdice lo du'u catra la .kaisar.

>>576

The cool thing about [zo <<nau] is that it sounds like "now" for the Enlgish speaker.

I am happy that you Lojbanized "Caesar" correctly, too. It annoys me greatly whenever people say (using Lojban's system) "sizr".

Yeah, I'm even an American and I hate that pronunciation. It's Yulius Kaisar, guys.

I love it, too, when someone stares at me blankly when I inform them that Latin didn't have a dj sound. "What about Julius Caeser, huh?" facepalm

http://www.lojban.org/no/publications/reference_grammar/chapter15.html