Message-Id: <199411050425.AA09311@nfs1.digex.net>
From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU
Date: Fri Nov  4 23:26:01 1994
Subject:      Re: Cowan weighs in #4: embedded imperatives
Status: RO
X-From-Space-Date: Fri Nov  4 23:26:01 1994
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu

la djan cusku di'e

> In Lojban, an imperative is true iff the command is carried out.

Is that true? I thought imperatives didn't have truth values. The
imperative is a request/order to {do} to act in such a way as to
make the statement with {ko} replaced by {do} true. If the command
is carried out, then the order is opbeyed. I don't see what meaning
it has to say that an obeyed command is "true" and one not obeyed
is "false".

> So
> with this convention we can say:
>
>         ko ciska lo plipe
>         Eat any apple!
>
> vs.
>
>         da poi plipe zo'u le du'u kokau ciska da cu jetnu
>         There is an apple such that "eat it!" is true.
>         There is an apple which you are commanded to eat!
>
> I haven't thought this out carefully, and the syntax may need some
> refinement, but I think the idea is basically right.

I don't think I like it, but I need to think more about it. I would prefer
a simpler convention, like saying that the scope of {ko} doesn't include
the prenex, then

        da poi plipe zo'u ko citka da
        There is an apple such that I'm requesting that you eat it.

In any case, I think such cases are very rare. The normal non-definite
imperatives are opaque.

Jorge