From jjllambias@hotmail.com Tue Apr 24 17:50:44 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 25 Apr 2001 00:50:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 69003 invoked from network); 25 Apr 2001 00:50:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 25 Apr 2001 00:50:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.148) by mta3 with SMTP; 25 Apr 2001 00:50:43 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 17:50:43 -0700 Received: from 200.69.11.40 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Wed, 25 Apr 2001 00:50:43 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.69.11.40] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Usage of logical connectives? Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 00:50:43 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Apr 2001 00:50:43.0533 (UTC) FILETIME=[C1CB87D0:01C0CD21] From: "Jorge Llambias" la robyspir cusku di'e >Since the truth value of a command is whether that command is carried out, >what >would be wrong with: > >ko nicygau ledo kumfa .ijo do kakne lenu klama le panka Probably {mi curmi le nu do klama le panka} is better than {kakne}. It's not that the sentence is wrong, it is just that it doesn't really have the intended meaning. It says that the two events are true together or false together, it does not say that the permission to go to the park is a consequence of the child cleaning up the room, nor that the parent wants the child to clean up the room. It doesn't say "I want you to clean up your room, and your recompense for doing it will be my permission to go to the park". Maybe the English doesn't really say all that either, maybe it only implicates it, and we can do the same in Lojban, but then our children won't learn to think logically... :) co'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.