Re: If I were King... (fwd)

[Iain Alexander <I.Alexander.bra0125@OASIS.ICL.CO.UK>]

I'm not convinced there's a genuine problem here.

> There is a problem with that. The simple logic of 'kanoi' is too powerful. Any
> statement of the form "If <false statement> then <true statement>." is true.
>   If I were King, then pigs would fly.
> is true because I'm not King. Swinish aviation is irrelevant.

This is only half the story.  The speaker is not king at the present time,
in the real ({ca'a}) world, but in the hypothetical world which we want
to talk about, he is, and the truth of the statement once more relies on
swinish aviation as you would expect.

Straightforward predicate calculus and propositional calculus concerns
itself with a simple world (model) where statements are either true or
false.  It doesn't deal with complications like tense or hypothetical worlds,
which are a vital part of language.  The truth of propositions varies with
time, and we consider alternative realities with very little ceremony.
(I believe there are extensions to predicate calculus which (attempt to)
deal with these issues, although I'm not familiar with them.)

So I believe that a simple {da'i} is indeed a totally adequate indication
that a hypothetical {ganai ... gi} situation is being discussed,
notwithstanding the many other methods we no doubt have available
(Mark's {va'o lenu}, Jorge's {lenu ... zo'u} ... let me chip in
{ca ro nu [da'i] mi nolraitru ku}).

Robert J. Chassell:
> Yes, definitely.  How would you say:

>     John would have gone to Edinburgh, but it was unexpectedly sunny
>     so he stayed in England.

One way would be to state that he _intended_ to go to Edinburgh

        la djan. platu filenu klama la .Edinbur.

(platu     pla      plan                 'plot'
x1 (agent) plans/designs/plots plan/arrangement/plot/(schematic) x2
for state/process x3         8c   7
the structure of an object would be represented as a state in x3)

mi'e .i,n.