[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Re: fancu



In a message dated 10/8/2001 1:18:04 PM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hotmail.com writes:


(Of course {na'i} is a perfectly ok illocutionary answer,
but the set of answers involved in indirect questions has
to be the set of logical answers.)


I suspect this is where we differ.  I want to stick to the illocutionary answers, because they are a moe manageable set and include all the logical ones that will ever be useful.  But they include a few that muck some things up as well (not really, but they take some work).

<I'm not convinced. Consider this:

"Does John know whether you have stopped beating your wife?"

1- "Yes, he does. He knows that I don't even have a wife."

2- "No, there's nothing for him to know about it. He knows
    that I don't even have a wife."

I find (2) more realistic. If "I don't even have a wife" was
one of the members of the whether-answer-set, then (1) should
be the right answer.>

I suppose the actual answer is { mi na'i co'u darxi lomi speni} (by theway, {darxi} by itself is not good for "beating" in htis context, nor is {co'u} for "stop")
The fact that a question does not meet its presuppositions does not make it less of a question, it merely makes it one that has a peculiar correctanswer.  Of course, the {na'i} answer my also allow in various expansions {noda speni mi} or "I never started being my wife" or....