Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from kantti.helsinki.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rHllM-00007DC; Wed, 14 Dec 94 06:56 EET Received: from fiport.funet.fi (fiport.funet.fi [128.214.109.150]) by kantti.helsinki.fi (8.6.9/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA11440 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 06:56:26 +0200 Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI (MAILER@FINHUTC) by FIPORT.FUNET.FI (PMDF V4.3-7 #2494) id <01HKMCRZKH000006CB@FIPORT.FUNET.FI>; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 04:44:34 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 2996; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 06:29:09 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7059; Wed, 14 Dec 1994 05:25:43 +0100 Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 20:24:04 -0800 From: Gerald Koenig Subject: kau Sender: Lojban list Reply-to: Gerald Koenig Message-id: <01HKMDG04O560006CB@FIPORT.FUNET.FI> X-Envelope-to: veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1701 Lines: 41 And said: Kau certainly seems glico to me, but I don't know about mabla. Kau works in virtually the same way as English interrogative pronouns that don't have the illocutionary force of questions. Does anyone have any idea how to render "indirect" interrogatives into predicate calculus? Wouldn't that settle the question of whether kau is malglico (or whether, instead, English is zabna logji)? [& into the bargain I would learn how to analyse English] --- And ********** >From djer: Well, I haven't really though this through, so it may be the blind leading the blind, but I can't resist And's interesting questions. The word list gives us an example, " I know WHO went to the store" as an appropriate usage for kau. "Who went to the store?" would be an interrogative use of who, but here I see it as a personal relative pronoun. As such it could be written with the 'universal' relative pronoun, "such that", giving "I know something (x) such that it went to the store" or mi djuno da zo'u da pa klama lo zarci. Interestingly enough my search didn't find any exact equivalent for "such that"; instead it seems to be enough just to use zo'u which means begin new related utterance. Anyway "da zo'u da" has come to be equivalent to "dakau" here if i. mi djuno dakau pa klama lo zarci is good lojban. Is the da on dakau necessary? Dropping into predicate calculus I get: E(a)E(x)E(y){ & person(x) & market(y) & went(x,y) & (a=I) & knows(I, x)} There is really nothing interrogative about this. It just claims x went to the market and I know x. The listener will have to ask if he wants to know who the mysterious x is. It could be xe'o one. Does this make any sense to you, And? djer