Return-Path: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@vms.dc.LSOFT.COM
Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id UAA14511 for <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 20:45:07 +0200
Message-Id: <199601161845.UAA14511@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 99A4079B ; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 19:45:06 +0100
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: Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
In-Reply-To:  (Your message of Tue, 16 Jan 1996 11:48:01 CST.) 
              <v02110101ad2191ebd160@[128.248.251.248]>
Content-Length: 955
Lines: 24

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}