From LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU Tue Jan 16 14:12:20 1996
Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id OAA08160 for <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 14:12:18 -0500
Message-Id: <199601161912.OAA08160@locke.ccil.org>
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 427A1C55 ; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 13:44:46 -0500
Date:         Tue, 16 Jan 1996 12:44:03 -0600
Reply-To: Scott Brickner <sjb@UNIVERSE.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Scott Brickner <sjb@UNIVERSE.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: laws, commandments, requirements
X-To:         "Steven M. Belknap" <sbelknap@uic.edu>
X-cc:         LOJBAN@cuvmb.bitnet
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
In-Reply-To:  (Your message of Tue, 16 Jan 1996 11:48:01 CST.) 
              <v02110101ad2191ebd160@[128.248.251.248]>
Status: OR
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length:  983


Steven M. Belknap writes:
>I remember a discussion this summer where lojbab wrote that lojban lacks a
>third person imperative (such as in Russian). I was wondering how to make a
>lojban sign "Do not Walk on the Grass"
>
><.i ehonai ko stapa levi sasfoi>

.i pe'i lu na curmi lenu stapa le sasfoi li'u

>I thought about using ko with a relative clause specifying who is the <ko>
>I am referring to (sort of like Thou shalt not of the King James Version of
>the Christian Bible). Ko seems tied to do, so maybe that's not right.

But, does not {do} refer to the reader of the sign?

>More generally, how would one write legislation, translate the ten
>commandments of <jegvo> tradition, or specify a design requirement of a new
>engineering device?

Generally, the referent of "do" is the intended recipient of the
communication.  If the value of "do" is not obvious from context,
one uses a vocative phrase to set its value.

{ge'e doi xiskri ko na catra}