From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Sep 28 22:02:37 2009 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:02:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MsUrF-00024K-1q for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:02:37 -0700 Received: from imr-db02.mx.aol.com ([205.188.91.96]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MsUr8-00021N-BF for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:02:36 -0700 Received: from imo-da04.mx.aol.com (imo-da04.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.202]) by imr-db02.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n8T52KT7021650 for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:02:20 -0400 Received: from MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com by imo-da04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.5.) id d.c8c.4b57329d (14467) for ; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:02:14 -0400 (EDT) From: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Message-ID: Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:02:14 EDT Subject: [lojban] Re: Translating "even" To: lojban-list@lojban.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_c8c.4b57329d.37f2eed6_boundary" X-Mailer: 6.0 for Windows XP sub 11501 X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com X-archive-position: 16260 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-list@lojban.org X-list: lojban-list --part1_c8c.4b57329d.37f2eed6_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 9/28/2009 23:58:18 Eastern Daylight Time, get.oren@gmail.com writes: > 'Even two people can't move it, how could just you alone?' > or > 'She wasn't even awake, let alone concerned.' > Here are my attempts at paraphrasing these two utterances. 1) Since two people aren't enough to move it, (surprise!) how could fewer people (or one person) do it? Or generalizing: Even X can't Y, so how could less-than-X Y? (or in cases of opposite extreme: ... how could more-than-X Y?) Since X is insufficient for Y to be true, it's surprising and doubtful that less than X would be sufficient for Y to be true. 2) (#2 also contains the idiom "let alone", which should be dealt with separately.) She was not awake, but she would have to be awake in order for her to be concerned. A necessary condition of being concerned is being awake. This necessary condition is not met so there can be no question of being concerned. Y requires X. X is not true, so Y is not true. Comments? mu'o mi'e stevon --part1_c8c.4b57329d.37f2eed6_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In a messag= e dated 9/28/2009 23:58:18 Eastern Daylight Time, get.oren@gmail.com write= s:


'Even two people can't= move it, how could just you alone?'=20
or=20
'She wasn't even awake, let alone concerned.'=20


Here are my attempts at paraphrasing these two utterances.
1) Since two people aren't enough to move it, (surprise!) how could fe= wer people (or one person) do it?

Or generalizing: Even X can't Y, so how could less-than-X Y? (or in ca= ses of opposite extreme: ... how could more-than-X Y?)
Since X is insufficient for Y to be true, it's surprising and doubtful= that less than X would be sufficient for Y to be true.

2) (#2 also contains the idiom "let alone", which should be dealt with= separately.)
She was not awake, but she would have to be awake in order for her to= be concerned.

A necessary condition of being concerned is being awake.  This ne= cessary condition is not met so there can be no question of being concerne= d.
Y requires X. X is not true, so Y is not true.

Comments?

mu'o mi'e stevon --part1_c8c.4b57329d.37f2eed6_boundary-- To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.