Date: Wed, 24 Dec 1997 14:27:10 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199712241927.OAA09071@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: Lee Daniel Crocker Sender: Lojban list From: "Lee Daniel Crocker (none)" Organization: Piclab (http://www.piclab.com/) Subject: Re: xor questions X-To: Lojban Group To: John Cowan In-Reply-To: <199712232312.PAA18435@red.colossus.net> from "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Jorge_J._Llamb=EDas?=" at Dec 22, 97 07:58:01 pm Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1045 X-From-Space-Date: Wed Dec 24 14:27:18 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU > I think that {ma} cannot really be used to get a strict logical > equivalent of "which"-questions... Aren't "which" questions really requests for the listener to choose from a set? {cuxna} seems useful here: {do cuxna ma poi se djica ku'o le tcati ce le ckafi} You choose what (that is desired) from the set [tea, coffee]? If you don't want to specifically indicate a chooser, {cmima} seems appropriate as well: {ma poi se djica cu cmima le tcati ce le ckafi} "What (that is desired) is a member of the set [tea, coffee]? In both cases, the relative clause can get as complex as needed to specify further conditions (such as that only one thing can be chosen {poi pa se djica}). No need to burden logical operators with that chore. -- Lee Daniel Crocker "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC