Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 14:04:59 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199712121904.OAA12678@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: And Rosta Sender: Lojban list From: And Rosta Organization: University of Central Lancashire Subject: Re: whether (was Re: ni, jei, perfectionism) X-To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1192 X-From-Space-Date: Fri Dec 12 14:05:00 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU John to Jorge to Lojbab: > > > I don't see much difference between: > > >I know where John went (indirect question). > > >I know the place where John went (relative clause). > > > > But they are different! The first one doesn't say that you know > > the place, it only says that you know where it is that John went. > > If you don't know Buenos Aires, you may still know that John went to > > Buenos Aires. If John went to New York, and you know N.Y., > > but you don't know that John went there, you still know the place > > where he went. > > I can get both readings of the second example: one synonymous with > the first example, where "know the place" means "know the identity > of the place", and one meaning what you indicate, where "know the > place" means "be familiar with the place". I get both readings for both sentences. The first sentence is syntactically ambiguous between an interrogative clause and a free relative clause. The second one I do not currently believe to be syntactically ambiguous (but I would love to discover some syntactic evidence that it is). Anyway, Jorge was, I presume, talking about the relevant "indirect question" reading of both sentences. --And