No Subject

[lojbab (Bob LeChevalier)]

Subject: Indirect Questions and sumti-raising

4th of 6 related messages

The following discussion is based on one of several proposals for the
place structure of "djuno", which has been thoroughly beat around for
several months, and whose answer is tied in to a lot of debate on these
proposals.  The official place structure is:

   x1 knows x2 about x3

For a long time it was felt that this was a cleft place structure, and that
it should be simply:

   x1 knows x2 (with the old x3 accessible through sumti raising)

The following discussion of indirect questions uses this place structure
proposal, but during the evolution of the cleft structures discussion, a
new place structure proposal has evolved which more nearly resembles the
original.  I decided not to change the discussion on indirect questions
since the changes themselves were irrelevant to the specifics being
discussed, and would make examples more difficult.  I return to the
place structure to show its implications at the end of the indirect
question discussion.

The proposed place structure at this writing recognizes that the
'subject' of knowledge may or may not be at a broader level than the
knowledge itself.  We say we know "geometry" when in fact we know many
facts about and methods of geometry.  Those facts do not involve
"geometry" itself except in a rudimentary way for which sumti raising is
too misleading (as is obvious in English with the parallel statements:

   I know [that] the sum of the three angles of a planar triangle [is ...]
   I know geometry.

We also have proposed adding a 4th place, an epistemology, as we have to
all questions of truth and falsity.  Thus the current proposal is:

   x1 knows that abstract statement x2 about subject x3 is true under
   epistemology x4


4. Indirect Questions:

2 ways of doing it:  when the indirect question word is a form of "ma",
just use sumti raising:

   mi djuno tu'a                   le  klama be le  zarci
   I  know  [some statement about] the goer  to the store, [namely, identity]

When the question word is not a sumti, use "kau" marker (memory hook: "pau"):

   mi djuno le  du'u        la djan. klama    le  zarci jikau         le  zdani
   I  know  the predication John     goes  to the store (Connection?) the house
      holds.                                              I know it!

   I know whether John goes to the store or to the house.

"kau" belongs to UI.

John Cowan wrote the preceding, but Nora adds an additional note here.
The term 'indirect question' is somewhat of a misnomer; all
Indo-European languages overlap use of relative pronouns with question
words, and all use these 'wh- words' in 'indirect questions'.  Grammarians could
also call them 'indirect restrictive clauses', but this would never sell.
Nora prefers to see 'indirect questions' as restrictive
relative clauses:

   mi djuno tu'a              zo'ekau                   poi  klama be le  zarci
   I  know  [something about] the something unspecified that goes  to the store,
                                  I know it!
   namely identity.

or even more preferably as the simpler abstract bridi:

   mi djuno le du'u       zo'ekau                   klama    le  zarci
   I  know  the statement the something unspecified goes  to the store.
                              I know it!

When the question word is not a sumti, you can use "kau" as a marker
(memory hook:  "pau"):

  mi djuno le  du'u        la djan. klama    le  zarci jakau          le  zdani
  I  know  the predication John     goes  to the store or             the house
     holds.                                              I know which!
  I know whether John goes to the store or to the house.

John also left out the third case of indirect question, which is the
other interpretation of the last English example.  This variety is more
easily handled:

   mi djuno tu'a              le  jei
   I  know  [something about] the truth-value of
      la djan. klama    le  zarci ja le  zdani
      John     goes  to the store or the house, [namely the value].

   I know whether John goes to the store or to the house.

Note that under the current proposed place structure for "djuno", the
examples regarding sumti raising would have to be redone, since you could
solve the problem more easily using the 'cleft' x3 subject.

   mi djuno             fi    le  klama be le  zarci
   I  know  (something) about the goer  to the store, [namely, identity].

----
lojbab = Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
         2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA
         703-385-0273
         lojbab@snark.thyrsus.com