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 m0rh4zS-00001pC; Wed, 22 Feb 95 02:31 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3644; Wed, 22 Feb 95 02:31:55 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 3641; Wed, 22 Feb 1995 02:31:55 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1127; Wed, 22 Feb 1995 01:28:02 +0100 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 19:34:15 EST Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Subject: Re: replies re. ka & mamta be ma X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 2353 Lines: 61 And: > "She knows that at least someone will come" doesn't mean "She knows > who will come", so I'm glad my method doesn't work. I agree, but we are discussing Lojban, not English, and I think the consistent thing in Lojban is that {ko'a djuno le du'u makau klama} does allow that {ko'a djuno le du'u da klama}. Just as {da klama} is a valid answer to {ma klama}. > > I am not saying that that is how "who" works in English, > > but in Lojban, all you are asking of your interlocutor is to fill > > in the blank. > But when you try to apply this to 'indirect' interrogatives, things > get rather strained: "there exists a word such that she knows that > an entity that that word could describe will come". It's easier > to simplify to "Ex she knows that x will come". It looks strained because you are expressing it like that. The easy way is "she knows what is the answer to the kau-less question". > How do you get your method to do "Ex she knows that x is the set > containing everyone who will come"? You could say: ko'a djuno le du'u makau du lo'i ba klama or: ko'a djuno le du'u makau klama romoi > "There are various words such > that she knows that the entities that these words could describe > will come"? How do you distinguish between the two meanings (she > knows of some of the comers, vs all of the comers)? How do you ask her to tell you who are all of the comers, vs some of them? {ma klama} only asks for a partial response. While {ma du lo'i klama} requires her to tell you what is the whole set. > I'd thought they were supposed to follow the English model. It > doesn't matter whether they do, so long as we can express both > da zohu koha djuno le duhu da klama > da zohu koha djuno le duhu da du lohi klama The one with {makau} is equivalent to neither of them. It allows for her knowing that noone will come, and also for just knowing that someone will come. > I've already expanded on 'indirect' interrogatives. As for direct > interrogatives, "Who came?" would be: > > Ex, please cause that I know that da klama > that da du lohi klama That may be "who came?" but it is not what {ma klama} means. Unless you don't accept {lo prenu} as an answer. {ma klama} means: Please fill in the blank in "___ klama" with a sumti, so as to make it a true statement. Jorge