From edward.cherlin.sy.67@aya.yale.edu Fri May 25 11:49:31 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: edward.cherlin.sy.67@aya.yale.edu X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 25 May 2001 18:49:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 92923 invoked from network); 25 May 2001 18:49:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 25 May 2001 18:49:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta7.pltn13.pbi.net) (64.164.98.8) by mta3 with SMTP; 25 May 2001 18:49:29 -0000 Received: from [192.168.0.2] ([216.103.90.93]) by mta7.pltn13.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.03.23.18.03.p10) with ESMTP id <0GDW007UAMXJ36@mta7.pltn13.pbi.net> for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Fri, 25 May 2001 11:49:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:48:51 -0700 Subject: Re: [lojban] Lessons In-reply-to: <20010524233048.B1498@twcny.rr.com> X-Sender: cherlin@postoffice.pacbell.net To: rob@twcny.rr.com Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" References: <20010524233048.B1498@twcny.rr.com> From: Edward Cherlin At 11:30 PM -0400 5/24/01, Rob Speer wrote: >On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 03:06:08AM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote: >> la robyspir cusku di'e > >Crap. I really do need a 'y' in there, don't I. Or at least a pause. (Although >I was spelling it 'rabspir'.) > >> > ganai ti solji gi mi ba citka le mi mapku >> > "If this is made of gold, then I will eat my hat." >> >> Compare with: >> >> "If this were made of gold, then I would eat my hat." >> >> Assuming "this" is not made of gold, I have no problem asserting >> the first sentence, but I certainly don't want to assert the >> second one. They can't both be translated by the same Lojban >> sentence. > >Okay, then we're essentially in agreement. ganai...gi and go...gi are >legitimate ways of saying if...then as long as you're not basing it on a >situation that is likely to be untrue. That part is what requires the >'subjunctive'. > >So... do we need a new tense for this? Perhaps use a couple of 'x' cmavo to >express "in another universe" or "in all possible universes" and one to return >to the universe of what we believe to be true? That isn't the solution. "If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride." "If your grandmother had wheels, she would be a trolley car." In both cases, it is *essential* to the rhetorical point that the condition is not only counterfactual but impossible. The logic in the first case is Impossible hypothetical: Wishes are horses. Fact: In real life, beggars are poor, and cannot own horses. Fact: Beggars naturally have plenty of wishes. Conclusion: Poor beggar makes wish, wish is horse, beggar gets on and rides off in all directions. As I said, this is rhetoric, not logic. This is the case in question, anyway. The second case is quite different, but still purely rhetorical. It is used as a retort to a conditional where the condition cannot be fulfilled. The ordinary logical connective is quite appropriate here, since the point is that a false premise implies anything. This case turns out to be simple, but we have to be clear on it and not confuse it with the other. >-- >la rab.spir > > >To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -- Edward Cherlin Generalist "A knot!" exclaimed Alice. "Oh, do let me help to undo it." Alice in Wonderland