Re: Indirect questions

[Chris Bogart <cbogart@QUETZAL.COM>]

On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, JORGE JOAQUIN LLAMBIAS wrote:
> >and that the alternative would in most cases be "better" (at
> >least by my own standards) than the indirect question.
>
> In most cases the alternative would be more cumbersome. "Better"
> in the sense that it would be logically more transparent, but "worse"
> in the sense that it would be almost unmanageable in ordinary
> conversation (you would need to use quantifiers and the prenex).

It seems to be commonly assumed that quantifiers and prenexes will only be
used when people are trying to be explicit and mathematical about
something.  I'm not sure I see why.  It's pretty concise compared to
prenexes that English-speaking logicians use.  We haven't used them that
much in casual Lojban chitchat, but maybe that's just malrarna bias.

I can't address this particular question because I don't see how in
general an indirect question can be stated another way.  It's kind of a
black box to me.  What's a non i.q. way of saying {ko'a na djuno ledu'u
xukau mi badri} (She doesn't know whether or not I am sad).

Chris