Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0qoKkl-00001DC; Sat, 24 Sep 94 03:14 EET DST Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 4097; Sat, 24 Sep 94 03:12:45 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 4095; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 03:12:44 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7856; Sat, 24 Sep 1994 02:11:25 +0200 Date: Sat, 24 Sep 1994 01:11:13 +0100 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Re: TECH: Transparence / Opaqueness X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: (Your message of Fri, 23 Sep 94 19:06:49 EDT.) Content-Length: 826 Lines: 21 Xorxes to Veion: > > ko dunda ci plise mi > > Give me 3 apples! > Imperatives by definition are neither true nor false in Lojban. That > means: make {do dunda ci plise mi} true. Since the distinction between > opaque and transparent rests on how the truth value of the statement > is determined, no such distinction is possible for imperatives. But contrast: I hereby command you to make it true that there are 3 apples that I'm given There are three apples such that I hereby command you to give me them The transparent/opque distinction (I suggest, out of my depth) has to do with scope of quantification with resepect to some 'irrealis' element of meaning, & a command, even in the form of an imperative, constitutes an irrealis element. (CF. "Give me a book - any book".) ---- And