Re: On logji lojbo discussions

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

>>(The convention for other Q words besides xu, seems to be that using kau
>>in a djuno expression means that a word which answers the question is what
>is
>>meaning asked for.   But the answer to xu is "go'i"/nago'i" which is not a
>>truth value but a claim.
>
>The answer can also be ja'a/na. That's how Lojban questions are usually
>explained: they ask for a replacement word that makes the utterance true.
>

1. Reference for bare ja'a/na as an answer to xu?  (A bare NA is gr
ammatical,
but I don't recall it being discussed wth respect to "xu").

2. Neother ja'a/na nor go'i/nago'i is a replacement for "xu" since xu is
a discursive having attitudinal grammar.  You cannot replace it by  the
answer and have the resault be grammatical.

Thus xu is obviously an exception to the replacement rule.


>>Thus an English translation of a du'u xukau
>>question might go like:
>>
>>Tell me whether <proposition x> is true
>><proposition x> or
>--More--
>><not proposition x>
>
>Not quite. The first should be "Tell me whether <proposition x>".
>The way you have it, the corresponding direct question is
>"Is <proposition x> true?", and then the yes/no answers would be:
>"Yes, proposition x is true", and "No, <proposition x> is not true".
>
>To give a more concrete example:
>
>Tell me whether John goes to the market.
>He does. (He goes to the market.)
>He doesn't. (He doesn't go to the market.
>
>Tell me whether "John goes to the market" is true.
>It is. ("John goes to the market" is true.)
>It isn't. ("John goes to the market" is not true.)

I see that they are different.  I do not clearly see how it realtes to
the Lojban.  Can you translate each of these into Lojban-as-you-see-it
so I can see how the answers seem to be responsive/non-responsive to the
indirect question?  (In my opinuion, phrasing a direct question, which the
above are, as an indirect question, isn't really kosher, but I understamd that
it is done in English.  Can it legitimately be done in Lojban?  Or does the
kau marking on the xu make the qu
estion unaskable?

>>We have a convention like many languages that repeating a claim is
>--More--
>>saying  yes to a yes/no question.  But I am not sure that "whether" is a
>>yes/no question.
>
>I don't see what else could it be. ("Whether" is also used for {ji}
>questions,
>as in "he told me whether he'd go to Paris or to Rome", which is in a
>sense two  yes/no questions in one.)

It is not any yes or no question - it is a pronoun representing the answer
to either a yes/no or a connective question.  Thus it works like "who"
and "what" grammatically, but in English at least, we cannot ask the
direct question with "wehether" "*Whether you go to the s
tore?"

lojbab
----
lojbab                                                lojbab@access.digex.net
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA                        703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: ftp.access.digex.net /pub/access/lojbab
    or see Lojban WWW Server: href="http://xiron.pc.helsinki.fi/lojban/";
    Order _The Complete Lojban Language_ - see our Web pages or ask me.