Message-Id: <199512082358.BAA08481@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Fri, 8 Dec 1995 23:56:15 +0000
Reply-To: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: ucleaar <ucleaar@UCL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: comments on CONN.TXT
To: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 862
Lines: 17

Jorge:
> > 7. 13.7 "An imperative sentence [lio] is true if the command is obeyed".
> > The discussion is potentially misleading. It should be explained that
> > one could obey the command not only by bringing tea, but also by instead
> > making this not be coffee. Therefore it is only an approximate and
> > misleading translation of the English.
> I'm glad you think that. The fact that {do} is an argument of the
> command is purely circumstantial, that's why I think that an attitudinal
> is much better than {ko} for imperatives. In other words, "act so as to
> make it true that X happens" does not need {do} to be an argument of X
> in general.

Is there no UI that'll do this? I imagine that {ko} was influenced
partly by English imperatives and partly by the wish to make imperatives
that contain references to the addressee one cmavo shorter.
---
And