From a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com Sat May 05 14:48:57 2001
Return-Path: <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
X-Sender: a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_2); 5 May 2001 21:48:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 80748 invoked from network); 5 May 2001 21:48:57 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 May 2001 21:48:57 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mta01-svc.ntlworld.com) (62.253.162.41) by mta2 with SMTP; 5 May 2001 21:48:57 -0000
Received: from andrew ([62.252.12.150]) by mta01-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.02.27 201-229-119-110) with SMTP id <20010505214855.XZTB283.mta01-svc.ntlworld.com@andrew> for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Sat, 5 May 2001 22:48:55 +0100
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: imperatives & scope (was: RE: Predicate logic and childhood.)
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 22:47:57 +0100
Message-ID: <LPBBJKMNINKHACNDIIGMOEFHEBAA.a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <18.c464136.282365bb@aol.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
From: "And Rosta" <a.rosta@dtn.ntl.com>

pc:
> arosta@uclan.ac.uk writes: 
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< 
> ko broda da 
> 
> means 
> 
> I hereby command that there be some da such that do broda da 
> 
> and not 
> 
> There is some da such that I hereby command that do broda da 
> 
> which cannot be expressed in Lojban satisfactorily. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> 
> {da zo'u ko broda da} and probably {da se broda ko}. Structure words 
> aside, extending scope requires anaphora of the scope determiner (here 
> ko = do). 

Three responses.


1. Your proposal is counter to current convention, which is that {ko} 
means "make this sentence true if {ko} were replaced by {do}".


2. Your proposal seems unable to cope with the contrast between (b) and
(c):

a. "I command that you cause her to eat something."
="I command that you cause that there be something that she eats."
b. "I command that there be something that you cause her to eat."
c. "There is something that I command you to cause her to eat."


3. There are much more common and more serious problems with the scope
of imperative operators than ones like (a-c). Consider (d/d'):

d. Make a note of my telephone number.
d'. Make a note of a telephone number of mine.

This means (e/e'):

e. For my telephone number, make it the case that you make a note of it.
e'. For a telephone number of mine, make it the case that you make a note 
of it.

It does NOT mean (f):

f. Make it the case that you make a note of my telephone number.
f'. Make it the case that you make a note of a telephone number of mine.

-- for these would be satisfied if you wrote down any old number but then
took steps to make sure that the phone company assigned this number to me.


--And.