Re: more epistemic perversity

[Goran Topic <amadan@USA.NET>]

Translation follows.


> >I< don't know this, and cannot know this.  I CAN
> >report that my son knows this.  Dreams are an example of subjective truths
> >that pertain to individuals pretty much solely.

ni'ofau tu'ale glibau

> (2) You know that the animal Avgust dreamed about is a fish.

.i mi se mipxu'a jimpe ledu'u do krici ledu'u la .avgust. cu jetnu cusku

> (1) You have two children, but John knows that you really have only one.

.i mi se brixu'a jimpe ledu'u do remei krici
.iku'i mi se mipxu'a jimpe ledu'u do pamei krici

> I find (1) highly abnormal and (2) quite normal. I'm not sure whether
> you agree with that evaluation of the _English_ sentences. Sometimes
> you seem to agree and sometimes disagree. As for these:

ni'ofau tu'ale jbobau

> (a) do rirni re da i ku'i la djan djuno le du'u do ca'a rirni pa da

.i mi nu'o krici la lojbab. ka'e jai drani
fi le sumti bezo djuno beili vo
.i tu'a ri ca'o cfipu mi
.iku'i secau ji'a lei la'edi'u sidbo ri'i mi de'u ka'e selsmu
to la'elu

  do ba rirni reda .iku'i la djan. djuno ledu'u do ca'a capu rirni pada

li'u mu'a toi

> (b) do djuno le du'u le danlu poi la avgust pu senva cu finpe
>
> I again find (b) normal and (a) very strange. You say that (a) is acceptable
> and (b) is not. So we definitely understand {djuno} differently.

.i mi na morji ledu'u cusku ledu'u le remoi cu xlali keikei la lojbab.
.i fi'o jimpe mi ly. pensi ledu'u roredo'i cu xamgu

co'o mi'e. goran.

























In English:

> (2) You know that the animal Avgust dreamed about is a fish.

I understand (by presupposition) that you believe August to be truthful.

> (1) You have two children, but John knows that you really have only one.

Here I understand (by your proposition) that you believe I have two
children. But, I at the same understand (by presupposition) that you
believe I have just one.

> I find (1) highly abnormal and (2) quite normal. I'm not sure whether
> you agree with that evaluation of the _English_ sentences. Sometimes
> you seem to agree and sometimes disagree. As for these:

In lojban:

> (a) do rirni re da i ku'i la djan djuno le du'u do ca'a rirni pa da

I could buy into lojbab's story about the epistemology place. It is a
bit too much for me. But, even without that, I could understand the
sentence, and find it acceptable (albeit probably not in its intended
sense) as, e.g.

  "You'll have two children, but John knows that till now you had only
one."

> (b) do djuno le du'u le danlu poi la avgust pu senva cu finpe
>
> I again find (b) normal and (a) very strange. You say that (a) is acceptable
> and (b) is not. So we definitely understand {djuno} differently.

I don't remember lojbab saying (b) is not acceptable. As I understand
him, he thinks both are fine, no?