Re: [lojban] Re: Duty, promice etc...

["Jorge Llambías" <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On 1/5/07, John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> All of this suggests that we may want to rethink just how
> the Lojban words {nupre, bilga} and maybe others are related
> to the English.  {nupre} is fine for the speech act, perhaps,
> but has to be used with care in translating other expressions
> involving "promise."

Which English expressions involving the noun "promise" should
not be translated by {lo se nupre} in Lojban?

Which English expressions involving the noun "obligation" should
not be translated by {lo se bilga} in Lojban?

> Incidentally, the use of "promise" for the thing promised is
> becoming stranger and stranger to my ear: as it is claimed for
> various contexts, it seems less and less plausible at home.
> "I got what he promised me" means something very different
> from "I got his promise to me," for example.

"What he promised me" can refer to some event, in which case
it is a promise (= lo se nupre), but it can also refer to an object,
in which case it is a kind of sumti raising for "what he promised
to give me".

"He did what he promised me"
ko'a pu zukte lo se nupre be ko'a bei mi

"I got what he promised me"
mi pu cpacu lo poi'i ko'a nupre lo nu dunda ce'u mi
mi pu cpacu da poi ko'a nupre lo nu dunda ke'a mi

mu'o mi'e xorxes