Received: from uga.cc.uga.edu by nfs2.digex.net with SMTP id AA29948 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for ); Sun, 11 Dec 1994 13:44:52 -0500 Message-Id: <199412111844.AA29948@nfs2.digex.net> Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU by uga.cc.uga.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1663; Sun, 11 Dec 94 13:44:45 EST Received: from UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UGA) by UGA.CC.UGA.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3513; Sun, 11 Dec 1994 13:44:29 -0500 Date: Sun, 11 Dec 1994 13:46:53 EST Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Subject: Re: jei X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Bob LeChevalier Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Sun Dec 11 13:44:55 1994 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu la lojbab cusku di'e > I guess I could also make > it clear with lekau jei broda , which to me seems more obvious than ledu'u > xukau - which seems very malglico for some reason to me (or malrarna) when > jei is explicitly available. xu just too strongly asks a question to me, > even if metalinguistically marked. {le du'u xukau} malglico? I would have said the opposite. In English, "whether" is the only irregular indirect question, in that its form is different from the direct one, while all the others use the same word for direct and indirect questions. In Lojban, I would expect all indirect questions to be treated in the same manner, why should "whether" be different? Because it is different in English? It is not a problem that "xu" asks a question. "kau" means "the answer to this question". That's why I much prefer to use question words with "kau" rather than other words, that are equally permitted. For example mi djuno le du'u makau klama I know who is coming. I know what is the answer to the question "who is coming?". mi smadi le du'u do ponse xokau plise I guess how many apples you have. I guess what is the answer to the question "how many apples do you have?". And I don't see why "xu" should be any different: mi do tugni le du'u xukau la lojban xamgu bangu I agree with you on whether Lojban is a good language. I agree with you on what is the answer to the question "is Lojban a good language?". I really don't see what is malglico about {le du'u xukau}, it seems to me to be very Lojbanic, making indirect questions more regular in Lojban than they are in English. If anything, I'd say using {jei} for "whether" is malglico, because it tends to make Lojban have the same irregularity that English has in having a special word for the yes/no indirect question. Jorge