[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lojban] Re: Duty, promice etc...
- To: lojban-list@lojban.org
- Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Duty, promice etc...
- From: John E Clifford <clifford-j@sbcglobal.net>
- Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 18:59:33 -0800 (PST)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=GaqqiNcQZj+b8cBycifluwJUWv4agpm/wQTqef01GzXiLvdpF6sYngAuK94rMLDf9tyVcxuRja9kCpLAP/DDl+cAZr931zRYfmV3y9lSGsAXrB3zpJ+RYSTACLqR/aExeT3FHnnfVZMijkWFAEKkG0SbiHvNYwL2ea1p9q/ZeUk=;
- In-reply-to: <925d17560701051450v6f30c761v3691f4b69289e100@mail.gmail.com>
--- Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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?
As noted earlier, "make a promise" and probably "break a promise" and "keep a promise."
all of these can be done (equivalently though not similarly) with {nupre} or even {lo se nupre}but
that doesn't mean that {lo se nupre} is good Lojban for "promise" -- the context has to change too
much.
> Which English expressions involving the noun "obligation" should
> not be translated by {lo se bilga} in Lojban?
"Has an obligation" at least, probably the other main cases (but "obligation" is different from
"promise" is a couple of ways: it is more general, need not involve something verbal (and so may
not have a definite beginning), can end in other ways that fulfillment or release and so on.
> > 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
Of course (see earlier) That is, spelling it out in Lojban would be {tu'a ...}.
> "He did what he promised me"
> ko'a pu zukte lo se nupre be ko'a bei mi
But not "He did his promise" That is"promise"is not treasted as what he promised, {le se nupre}.
> "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
And again, not "He got his promise" which means something very different.