From jjllambias@hotmail.com Sun Aug 05 11:38:26 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: jjllambias@hotmail.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_2_0); 5 Aug 2001 18:38:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 42434 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2001 18:38:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 5 Aug 2001 18:38:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.241.179) by mta1 with SMTP; 5 Aug 2001 18:38:24 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:38:24 -0700 Received: from 200.41.247.55 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Sun, 05 Aug 2001 18:38:24 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.41.247.55] To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Bcc: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: ka + makau (was: ce'u (was: vliju'a Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 18:38:24 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2001 18:38:24.0876 (UTC) FILETIME=[CF773AC0:01C11DDD] From: "Jorge Llambias" la xod cusku di'e >Going back a moment, "le jei broda" = a truth value; a real in [0, 1]. The >ANSWER to the question "xu broda" is the same. Not really, at least not the full answer. The full answer to {xu broda} is either {ja'a broda} or {na broda}, or if you like something in between: {ja'aru'e broda}, etc. The full answer is never a real in [0,1], and {le du'u xukau ...} makes reference to the full answer, a full bridi. >Jorge, I can understand your recent explanatory post better if I stop >thinking of "makau" and use "ko'a" in its place. And yet it is not the same thing. In {la meris djuno le du'u ko'a klama le zarci} le listener is expected to identify ko'a, either because it was previously assigned or from context. >Really, we are not >talking about questions so much as we are talking about algebraic >variables. And, since du'u + Qkau doesn't turn the abstraction into the >answer to the question, I really don't see why they are called "indirect >questions" at all. They are indirect statements; statements with variables >that are assumed to have known values that the speaker doesn't know or >isn't revealing. Not necessarily _known_ values. Many questions don't have known answers. >mi djuno le du'u makau pu zarci le klama i u'i xu go'i i lo klama cu rupnu ma >Unless du'u + Qkau really means 'the answer to the question posed by >removing "kau"', why does the above statement imply that I know WHO went >to the store? I could know simply that somebody did go to the store. Even in that case {da klama le zarci} is a possible answer to {ma klama le zarci}, but makau makes reference to the contextually relevant answer. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp