From rob@twcny.rr.com Tue Jun 19 20:41:43 2001
Return-Path: <rob@twcny.rr.com>
X-Sender: rob@twcny.rr.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 20 Jun 2001 03:41:42 -0000
Received: (qmail 61742 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2001 03:41:42 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 20 Jun 2001 03:41:42 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mailout1.nyroc.rr.com) (24.92.226.146) by mta3 with SMTP; 20 Jun 2001 03:41:41 -0000
Received: from mail1.twcny.rr.com (mail1-1.nyroc.rr.com [24.92.226.139]) by mailout1.nyroc.rr.com (8.11.2/RoadRunner 1.03) with ESMTP id f5K3eIf28495 for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 23:40:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from riff ([24.95.175.101]) by mail1.twcny.rr.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-59787U250000L250000S0V35) with ESMTP id com for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 23:40:16 -0400
Received: from rob by riff with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 15CYo8-0001Be-00 for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 23:37:32 -0400
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 23:37:32 -0400
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: possible worlds
Message-ID: <20010619233732.A4343@twcny.rr.com>
Reply-To: rob@twcny.rr.com
References: <8e.17392b9c.28616ace@aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8e.17392b9c.28616ace@aol.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i
X-Is-It-Not-Nifty: www.sluggy.com
From: Rob Speer <rob@twcny.rr.com>

On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 10:56:14PM -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 6/19/2001 8:10:08 PM Central Daylight Time, 
> thinkit8@lycos.com writes:
> 
> 
> > how about this? "if i were rich i'd have a house" goes to
> > "fau le nu mi ricfu kei mi ponse lo zdani". i don't like using the 
> > UI cmavo to do this either, but i think there are substitutes.
> > 
> 
> Nice, but what does it have to do with possible worlds? (the answer "nothing" 
> is to its advantage) Is it clearly superior to {ganai mi ricfu gi mi ponse 
> lo zdani}. The latter is, I suppose uninterestingly true, the former appears 
> to be false or of uncertain -- and uncertainly obtainable -- truth value. 
> So, as assertions, the advantage seems to lie with {ganai} form. But if this 
> is something else than an assertion, it does seem to move over into the area 
> of UI: intentions, hopes, and the like.

Eep. No. Even I, the vehement supporter of more widespread use of logical
connectives, say that you absolutely can't translate that with {ganai} or
anything of the sort. Since the statement presupposes that you are not rich,
the {ganai mi ricfu} part is necessarily true.

I thank xorxes for pointing out the existence of {da'i}; it seems to fit the
bill. However, what if you are describing someone else hypothesizing a possible
world? Do you use {da'idai} and get into two murky areas at once?

And do you use {da'i} with an ordinary logical connective, like:

{ganai da'i mi ricfu gi mi ponse lo zdani} ?

I still don't find this as elegant as Loglan's {foi} and {fio}; those would be
similar to Lojban modals or tenses, which would have a more useful role in the
grammar of the sentence than a UI cmavo. However, at least this doesn't seem to
leave a gaping conceptual hole in the language, and I suppose it's the best we
can realistically achieve within the baseline.
-- 
Rob Speer


