[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
At 02:23 PM 12/31/02 -0500, Invent Yourself wrote:
On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, Jorge Llambias wrote: > la lojbab cusku di'e > > > >mi nitcu fi lenu setca lei vi cukta ce'u poi tanxe (vo'e? depending on > >what > > > >it means these days, or maybe ri to avoid the question) > > > > > > > >which might back-translate as> > > >I need that these books be inserted into something which will box them.> > > >in case I've mangled things unrecognizably. > > > > > >And what goes in x2 of nitcu? What do you answer to {go'i ma}? > > > >da .a'o, or maybe da da'i(cu'i?) > > > >There may in fact be nothing which exists that goes there, but that does> >not remove your need for it. Why force people to claim a particular value,> >when I do not know what that value is, or whether it exists. > > We don't want to force people to claim a particular value exists, > of course. That's why da is wrong and that's why I use lo'e > there. Does it make sense to want or need things that don't exist? It could be said that the sentence takes the speaker to an imaginary world where the item exists; it's hypothetical anyway, so why be fussy about truth values?
That is why I suggested da'i-marking. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@hidden.email Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org