Re: [lojban] Subjunctive?

[Robin Turner <robin@Bilkent.EDU.TR>]

From: Robin Turner <robin@Bilkent.EDU.TR>



On Wed, 26 Jan 2000 C.D.Wright@solipsys.compulink.co.uk wrote:

> From: C.D.Wright@solipsys.compulink.co.uk
> 
> > >      If I had a million pounds/dollars/kroner
> > >          then I'd be rich.
> >  
> > why is this a complicated issue, doi jbopre? 
> >  
> > is there something wrong with lu 
> > "ganai mi ponse lo megdo rupnu gi mi ricfu" 
> > li'u? 
> 
> The point is that a logical if/then is always true if 
> the first part is false, and the whole issue about a 
> subjunctive is that the first part is always false.
> The logical if/then simply does not carry the same 
> implications that the English does, and the question
> is - how can the following be translated accurately:
> 
>     If I were to be given a million pounds
>         then I'd be rich.
> 
> Whatever the lojban version is, it must carry the same
> implication concerning the implausibility of the first
> part of the statement.
> 

This is where I disagree, though a lot depends on your interpretation of
the word "translation" (see also Jorge's response to my earlier post). I
would hold that a translation should include the important information
contained in the original (of course) but does not need to include all the
information. For example, in translating "I went on Monday"' I would
probably say {mi klama de'i la padjed.} not {mi pu klama tu de'i la
padjed.} since I would rely on context for the tense and direction
information, and would only include them if there was some danger of
misinterpretation (e.g. the listener might think that I was coming, not
going, or that I meant next Monday rather than last Monday).

Similarly, with the million dollars example, I do not think that it is
normally necessary to inform the listener that I do not, and probably will
never, have a million dollars. For example, in Turkish there are three
 alternatives in tensing the conditional here:

bir milyon dolarIm olursa - aorist tense; likely event
bir milyon dolarIm olsaydi - past tense; counterfactual
bir milyon dolarIm olsa - untensed; possibility of event not specified.

I would only use the counterfactual if I wanted to emphasise the fact that
it is impossible (probably adding "kes~ke" - "if only") and would apply
the same principle to Lojban.

As for the semantics of IF, I do not see any major problems. Granted, it
includes the possibility that I may be rich if I do not possess a million
dollars, but this is true in any case, since I am also rich if I possess
two million dollars, 999,999 dollars, or no money at all but a large
quantity of gold. However, it might be clearer to use a bridi rather than
a connective, e.g.

lenu mi ponse lo megdo rupnu cu nibli lenu mi ricfu

for the hypothetical example we've been discussing. However, we would
normally want to say what we would _do_ if we had a million dollars, in
which case {mukti} would be more appropriate. 

co'o mi'e robin.


--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

ONElist:  your connection to people who share your interests.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com