Date:  Fri, 21 Nov 1997 13:03:44 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199711211803.NAA20593@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: And Rosta <a.rosta@UCLAN.AC.UK>
Organization: University of Central Lancashire
Subject:      Re: Indirect questions
X-To:         LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 2522
X-From-Space-Date: Fri Nov 21 13:04:08 1997
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

> >> I would have said {xu do badri} means: repeat this
> >> statement replacing the question word so as to make it
> >> a true statement. The replacement for {xu} is in a first
> >> instance either {na} or {ja'a}, and ususally you will repeat
> >> by using {go'i}.
> >
> >I know you think this, and I don't think it incorrect, but I
> >do think it an unnecessarily metalinguistic characterization
> >of the meaning of questions.
>
> But isn't your characterization just as metalinguistic?
> You're replacing one metalinguism (xu) with another (ko).

As with pretty much every utterance there is a nonpropositional,
"illocutionary" component. But in addition your characterization
of the meaning of questions involves replacing one word by
another. That's the unnecessarily metalinguistic bit. I do that
propositionally, which is not only in itself preferable,
especially for a logical language, but also works better for
indirect questions.

>  > I think the answer to a question (a piece of text = an
> >act by a speaker) is either an act of supplying information, or a
> >piece of information. We seem to agree on this, but not on
> >whether either kind of answer can be x2 of djuno.
>
> I'm not sure whether you're saying that a piece of text
> is an act. By an act, do you mean a {nu}?

A nungasnu. The speaker is a gasnu. The text is a nungasnu.
The text type is some kind of abstract intensional thingy.

> Do you mean something like:
>
>     le nu mi cusku lu go'i li'u cu danfu lu xu do badri li'u
>     My saying "I am" is an answer to "Are you sad?".
>
> Or do you mean:
>
>     le mi se cusku cu danfu lu xu do badri li'u
>     What I said is an answer to "Are you sad?".

The former. I think x2 of cusku is a text-type, not an actual
utterance.

> >> >And {xu do badri} would
> >> >be equivalent to something like {gau ko mi djuno le du`u
> >> >xu kau do badri}.
>
> But if you are willing to use {ko} and {xukau},

I'm willing to use {xukau}. I just see it as a verbal abbreviation
of a more complex fragment of logical structure.

> why not just:
> {ko cusku le sedu'u xukau do badri} = "Say whether you're sad".

Doesn't that mean {ko cusku lu xu kau do badri li`u}?
I can't see it as meaning "Say whether you're sad".

Just to remind myself: I take it that the point of this thread
is still the question:
  What is the appropriate technical definition of an (indirect)
  question, and how might an (indirect) question be phrased in
  Lojban in such a way as to make its logical structure explicit?

--And