From a.rosta@ntlworld.com Thu Jan 17 18:08:12 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: a.rosta@ntlworld.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 18 Jan 2002 02:08:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 46562 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2002 02:08:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m9.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 18 Jan 2002 02:08:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta02-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.42) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 18 Jan 2002 02:08:11 -0000 Received: from andrew ([62.253.86.162]) by mta02-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with SMTP id <20020118020809.LRQS8848.mta02-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew> for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2002 02:08:09 +0000 To: "Lojban@Yahoogroups. Com" Subject: Q-kau 2002: halfway towards a solution/resolution Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2002 02:07:30 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 From: "And Rosta" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=77248971 X-Yahoo-Profile: andjamin X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 12977 The goals of our recurrent Q-kau debates are these: 1. to find a logical form to express what is or can be expressed in English and other languages by (so-called) interrogative constructions 2. to find a (logically) appropriate way to express such logical forms in Lojban (or to find a robust way to rationalize current usage in terms of such logical forms) I have been thinking about (1) and have come to agree with Jorge and pc that what is expressed in English by (so-called) interrogative constructions can be rendered into logical form by a formula involving the predicate "X is a proposition that is a completion of incomplete proposition Y", where an incomplete proposition is something that has the form of a proposition but contains unbound variables; a proposition that completes an incomplete proposition is one that replaces unbound variables by bound variables (bound by a quantifier or by coreference relations). I won't explain how I justify these conclusions, since I am only agreeing with a position already espoused by Jorge and pc. At any rate, I consider (1) to be now resolved, so the remaining issues are: (A) Ignoring current usage, what would be the best way to express in Lojban an incomplete proposition and its unbound variables? My best shot would be a du'u clause containing "tu'o da" for unbound variables. (B) The method in current usage is to express the unbound variables by a Q-word + kau, within a du'u clause (which expresses the predicate "is the incomplete proposition P"). The only way I can rationalize this is to propose a rule that says "_Q-word kau_ expresses an unbound variable". The relationship between Q-word with kau and Q-word without kau would then be a relatively idiomatic one, in that a sentence with Q-word without kau would be an abbreviation of a more complex sentence in which the Q-words are with kau. Is this sufficiently 'lojbanic'? If yes, then current usage can be given the blessing of the gods of logic. If no, then the devotees of the gods of logic will want to alter their usage in a manner yet to be established. --And.