From C.D.Wright@solipsys.compulink.co.uk Tue Feb 1 00:33:42 2000
X-Digest-Num: 350
Message-ID: <44114.350.1893.959273825@eGroups.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 08:33:42 +0000
From: C.D.Wright@solipsys.compulink.co.uk
Subject: Re: Subjunctive?

> > The logical if/then simply does not carry the same 
> > implications that the English does, and the question
> > is - how can the following be translated accurately:
> > 
> > If I were to be given a million pounds
> > then I'd be rich.
> > 
> > Whatever the lojban version is, it must carry the same
> > implication concerning the implausibility of the first
> > part of the statement.

> This is where I disagree, though a lot depends on your
> interpretation of the word "translation" ... I would
> hold that a translation should include the important
> information contained in the original (of course) but
> does not need to include all the information.


and then:


> ... I would rely on context for the tense and direction
> information, and would only include them if there was some
> danger of misinterpretation 


So, how do you know that the information that I don't have a 
million pounds is not important? The original question was 
how one should translate it, not whether, in your opinion, 
it's important.


I am a terse writer. Unless I have evidence that it will be 
necessary for a given audience to write the same thing in six 
different ways, I generally rely on the precise expression of
single ideas, and for a translator to decide that information
is irrelevant is dangerous.

I agree entirely that translation is hard. In fact, the more
I have studied language I have come to the conclusion that it
simply cannot work at all !! language itself is a miracle,
and translation a mysterious art. I accept that you know more
about translation than I do or ever will, and it's now clear
that if ever I expect some of my work to be important enough
to translate, I had better not use language the way I usually
do, since I can't expect a translator to express everything
important *in_my_opinion* (as the author) in the original.


> Similarly, with the million dollars example, I do not think
> that it is normally necessary to inform the listener that
> I do not, and probably will never, have a million dollars.

By if I express it with the subjunctive, then I *do* think
it's important.


> As for the semantics of IF, I do not see any major problems.
(snip)
> Granted, it includes the possibility that I may be rich if
> I do not possess a million dollars, but this is true in any
> case, since I am also rich if I possess two million dollars,
> 999,999 dollars, or no money at all but a large quantity of
> gold.

I agree. However, there are questions that remain, and I
believe that most of this discussion arises because people
have been giving examples and assumed that you would see
the question they are ntending to ask.


So, how would you translate the following:

" If I were to have a million pounds
then I'd be rich. "

given that I, as the author, have used the subjunctive, an
otherwise obsolete form, to carry the additional information
that I believe the antecedent to be unlikely ever to be true.


And how would you translate the following:

" If I were to finish this project today
then I would use it tomorrow. "

given that I, as the author, want to include the implication
that the dependent clause has no real meaning in the absence
of the truth of the antecedent. Not only is there a causal
connection, but consideration of the second part is completely
pointless without the first.


cdw


-- 
\\// ze'uku ko jmive gi'e snada