[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
la and cusku di'e
Is there a difference between A and B?
A. X knows that whatever colour of box Z needs, Y knows that
Z needs a box of that colour.
B. Whatever colour of box Z needs, X knows that Y knows that
Z needs a box of that colour.
I'm not sure. In A it is clear that X need not know what the colour is, and it seems to be strongly implied that X does not know. In B, it seems that X too must know what the colour is. Suppose Z needs a red box. Then B means that X knows that Y knows that Z needs a red box, and that would seem to require X too to know that Z needs a red box.
If there is, which does C mean? C. X knows that Y knows what colour of box Z needs.
In English, I would say it means A. X need not know what the colour is.
I'm not thinking clearly, but I'm wondering whether it is really always the case that a makau will be paraphrasable by a main clause wh-ever.
It would seem from this example that it can be paraphrased with a wh-ever in the next outer clause, but not further than that. That is if Lojban is like English in this, which is not necessarily the case given that Lojban's questions are somewhat different than English, as they can be embedded as much as you like.
> Then to restrict the scope to the
> subordinate bridi we might use {da}:
>
> ko'a djuno le du'u ko'e nitcu lo'e tanxe poi dakau skari ke'a
> She knows that he needs a box of any colour
>
> Notice that then we have a difference between:
>
> (3) ko'e nitcu lo tanxe poi dakau skari ke'a
> He needs a box of any colour
Is the lo here deliberate, or should it be lo'e?
It should be {lo'e}.
> and: > > (4) ko'e nitcu lo tanxe poi makau skari ke'a > He needs a box of whatever colour > > In (4) there is some colour such that he needs a box of that > colour, but I'm not saying which colour it is because it may > not be relevant (I may not know which colour it is, either) I don't apprehend the difference in meaning between 3 and 4.
I meant (4) to mean "He needs a box of a certain colour, whatever that is". My wording was not very good. In other words, I don't know, or don't care what the colour is, but he needs it of that colour.
I'm still not convinced about main clause makau, though I am conscious of the XIAR law.
Not a very reliable law, that one.
ko'a ba viska makau poi vi klama "She'll see whoever comes"
Well, not quite. With my proposed interpretation it would mean "She will see whoever it is that she sees and comes", not necessarily all of those that come.
Normally a statement ought to be embeddable within {mi xusra lo'e
du'u}. But
mi xusra loi du'u ko'a ba viska makau poi vi klama
means something like "I say who it is that comes and she will see",
whereas you want it to mean "Whoever comes, I say that she will see
them".
My rephrasing would give: "whoever it is that comes and she will see, I say that she will see them."
mi xusra loi jetnu je du'au ko'a ba viska ce'u poi vi klam means "I assert each true completion of [she will invite __ that comes]". Which is not very informative at all. Basically I am pretty confused.
I'm not too sure of any of this either. mu'o mi'e xorxes _________________________________________________________________Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail