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 m0rh2Yx-00001pC; Tue, 21 Feb 95 23:56 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 1026; Tue, 21 Feb 95 23:56:24 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 1024; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 23:56:24 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1843; Tue, 21 Feb 1995 22:52:31 +0100 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 21:32:21 +0000 Reply-To: ucleaar Sender: Lojban list From: ucleaar Subject: Re: Existence and occurrence of events (was: ago24 & replies) X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: (Your message of Mon, 20 Feb 95 14:29:45 EST.) Content-Length: 1145 Lines: 24 Jorge: > And & pc: > > > > The only way in which "try" implies "fail" is 'Gricean'. > > > > I may be missing something, but to me it seems obvious that if > > > > I try for an event and it turns out to be real then I have > > > > succeeded. I cannot see how it could be otherwise. > > > Well, it might just come to pass without my effort being at all > > > relevant to its coming to pass. If an earthquake moves a stone from my > > > path after my best efforts have failed, I cannot claim to have either > > > managed or succeeded in moving the stone, even though I tried to and the > > > stone is indeed moved. > > I take your point. > But what is the event here? Is the event I tried for that "the earthquake > move the stone", or that "I move the stone"? > In Lojban "I try to move the stone" is {mi troci le nu mi muvgau le rokci}. > If the event I try for occurs, then I've succeeded. If some other related > event occurs, but not the one I've tried for, then I've failed. You're right if you translate it as {mi troci lo nu mi muvgau lo rokci}. If you translate it as {mi troci lo nu lo rokci cu muvdu} then you're wrong. --- And