Date:  Wed, 7 Jan 1998 16:54:24 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199801072154.QAA22310@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: "Mark E. Shoulson" <shoulson@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <shoulson@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: knowledge and belief
X-To:         LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
In-Reply-To:  <v03110704b0d859ff0b63@[128.248.251.102]> (message from Steven
              Belknap on Tue, 6 Jan 1998 16:24:41 -0600)
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length: 1324
X-From-Space-Date: Wed Jan  7 16:54:33 1998
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 16:24:41 -0600
>From: Steven Belknap <sbelknap@uic.edu>
>Cc: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu
>
>mark shoulson:
>>Just to muddy the waters further, how does this play with those indirect
>>questions that have been making so many heads spin?  What about "Steven
>>knows that Jorge knows who went to the store"?  You can't replace the second
>>"knows" with "believes" or "opines", even in Lojban, can you?  The first
>>maybe.  Does {mi krici ledu'u makau klama le zarci} make any sense in
>>Lojban, as a "less certain" form of {mi djuno ledu'u makau klama le zarci}
>>as the claim seems to be?
>
>That would be:
>
><la stivn cu djuno du'u la xorxes cu djuno nu da cu klama le zarci kei>
>
>I don't think this adds any additional problem, although perhaps I'm
>missing something.

Well, you're missing the gadri before nu and du'u...

But didn't you just say that I couldn't truthfully say <da djuno ledu'u de
djuno ledu'u bu'a>?  And isn't that exactly what you have written there?
Also, your sentence would translate to "Steven knows that Jorge knows that
someone went to the store"; indirect questions tend to need kau.

I'll accept the argument that {krici} would work as well as {djuno} here,
though I still don't really understand your (Steven's) distinction between
the two.

~mark