Return-Path: Return-Path: Date: Fri Mar 1 15:29:59 1991 Message-Id: <9102272133.AA10995@mwunix.mitre.org> From: cbmvax!uunet!mwvm.mitre.org!m16569 (Carl Burke) To: lojban-list%snark.thyrsus.com@mwunix.mitre.org Subject: Tenses ... my two cents Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Fri Mar 1 15:29:59 1991 X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!mwvm.mitre.org!M16569 As I understand it, this debate which has been clogging my in-basket is raging over whether or not to incorporate a fourth "time" cmavo, for a set of "past, present, future, and *not applicable*". The fourth tense refers to (in a relativistic sense) events outside the perceptible area of space-time; *fourth tense* events cannot possibly interact with the speaker, at least in the location/interval in question. Is this an adequate non-technical summation? This seems to be a useful concept, but it would find applicability outside the strictly physics-related relativity frame. For example, a criminal's alibi is an attempt to assert a *fourth tense* relation with the crime, under the prevailing conditions. Locked room mysteries, by limiting the communications means, isolate the "world-line" of the crime; the detective must identify the means by which communication occurred to reach the goal of "solving the case". In the limit, barring FTL communications a la Bell's Theorem, you have the cases argued (ad nauseum) so far. This would appear to be every bit as useful as the addition of a third value to traditional Boolean logic: True, False, *unask the question*. The third value holds where neither a true or false value is applicable; the traditional question is "When did you stop beating your wife?" I seem to recall that there is another way to assert this third truth value in Lojban, but I do not recall the method. If this is available, then there is no need (other than shorthand convenience) for the fourth tense; you merely state that *neither true nor false* *actor* *relation* *arguments* ***at all times/places, if you must specify*** Maybe this will breathe yet more life into this maelstrom. Maybe not. Carl Burke m16569@mwvm.mitre.org My opinions are my own, and are *True/False* held by my employers. * * Carl