From Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Tue Jun 19 13:38:24 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 19 Jun 2001 20:38:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 88501 invoked from network); 19 Jun 2001 20:38:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Jun 2001 20:38:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mk.egroups.com) (10.1.1.30) by mta1 with SMTP; 19 Jun 2001 20:38:23 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Received: from [10.1.2.36] by mk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 19 Jun 2001 20:38:21 -0000 Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 20:38:17 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: possible worlds Message-ID: <9god7p+gpgj@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 1055 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 193.149.49.79 From: "A.W.T." X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 8154 Am I missing something in the Book or is the problem with possible worlds (i.e. the subjunctive etc. issue) still unsolved? Up to the moment I'm unsatisfied with sentences like "I should have done...", "If I were rich..." (Se fossi ricco mi comprarei una villa...) and the like. Are those venerable old gentlemen still sticking to the "dead language"* Loglan more aware of problems like those! Isn't e.g. the way pointed out at "http://www.loglan.org/Articles/I-would-if-I-could.html" a possible approach? IMHO, lojban attitudinals, evidentials, discursives etc. are very good and unique lojbanic features, yet do not solve here. The heavy discussion on extending their functional range (which I do not share) shows that there still is lack of things the kind mentioned above. *) It no longer seems to be a dead language, as Loglan obviously is present and vivid on the net with productive essays instead of whole surges of endless and boring threads most (interested!) people can no longer afford the time to follow. mi'e .aulun.