su

["Mark E. Shoulson" <cbmvax!uunet!CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU!cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu!shoulson>]

>Date:         Thu, 16 Jan 1992 18:13:11 GMT
>From: CJ FINE <C.J.Fine%BRADFORD.AC.UK@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
>X-To:         cortesi@INFORMIX.com
>X-Cc:         Lojban list <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>

>>
>>
>> Much talk about the use of the subjunctive in English
>> and Romance languages in sci.lang.  Could someone remind
>> me of how the counterfactual subjunctive (If I were a rich man)
>> and others are handled in Lojban?

>As far as I can see, it's simply a logical "na.a" (or whichever
>logjyselma'o is appropriate) together with an attitudinal "da'i" - or
>maybe another member of the "da'i" series. I don't recall how that scale
>was defined - I have a feeling that "da'inai" was "really", in which case
>"da'icai" would mean "I really really am not suggesting that this is
>the case, but just supposing...", and "da'icu'i" is "I really don't know
>whether it's the case or not..."

Yes, that's one way to look at it.  Or else use "nibli" (logically entails)
or "rinka" (causes) or "krinu" (justifies) or "mukti" (motivates).  Other
attitudinals may be appropriate, too, like ".ianai" or ".ainai", depending
on the situation.

>> ko poi kakne cu fanva pe'u ta vau
                         ^^^^
Note that "pe'u" is a vocative (COI), not an attitudinal (UI).  Thus, it
works like "coi" or "co'o", so "pe'u ta" means "please, this", i.e.
addressing the "please" to the thing pointed to.  The "pe'u" eats the "ta"
so it's not a sumti of fanva, which you want it to be.  Either use a UI
word or do "pe'u do'u" or something.

>I'll have a go at some of them

>>     If I were you, I wouldn't eat that.
>   da'i mi du do nagi'a na citka ta

It's not all that clear what's the counterfactual.  Maybe moving the "da'i"
to after the "du" or the "do" might be clearer.

>Perhaps better
>   da'i mi mintu do li'o
Standard rant about how "li'o" doesn't let you be ungrammatical.  Actually,
here, you're not ungrammatical, so I guess it's okay.

>But a less literal translation like
>   du'o mi do ei li'o
Interesting.....
>or
>   fi'o jinvi mi do ei li'o
>might be better still.

Or, using the "nibli" model, something like:

lenu mi du da'i do cu nibli lenu mi na citka ta
The-event: I equal (supposing!) you logically-entails the-event: I not eat
that

Perhaps another word for "nibli".  But the whole thing is too literal, and
doesn't convey what we want.  I prefer your more non-literal translations,
or even just "pe'i do .ei na citka ta".

>>     I would never say that unless it were true.
>   noroiku mi de'u bacru .ija ri jetnu da'i[cu'i]
>   (depending on the interpretation of the counterfactual)
>>     Whether it be so or not, he's still a scoundrel.
>   gu de'u da'icu'i gi ko'a xlapre .ia

Watch it here.  Remember, "de'u" and "ko'a" are both sumti, and you're
conjoining them with "gu/gi".  So you're saying "(previous-sentence
whether-or-not him1) is-bad-person".  Not positive how to interpret the
conjunction in this case.  Maybe "ni'inai de'u ko'a xlapre .ia", though
that implies a little more surety in the truth of "de'u" but emphasizes its
immateriality in this situation.  Throw in a "da'icu'i" after the "de'u"
and it gets better.  And maybe a different BAI, like "ki'unai" or whatever.


>>     He worked as though there were no tomorrow.
>   ko'a gunka sekai lenu noda da'i balvi

Of course, this sentence is much too figurative to be translated literally
and still get the English meaning, but there's nothing wrong with a literal
translation to study.  This looks okay, I guess, but other forms might be
better.  None spring to my mind just now.

>>     We could but hope it were for the best.
>   mi pu nalpacna pacna lenu de'u fa selja'e lo xamgu

This is weird.  What's the "fa" doing there?  It immediately takes a "ku"
after it so as not to be ungrammatical, which means nothing, so why add it?
Otherwise, upon reflection, it's not bad.  Not sure how that tanru would go
over.  I'll leave that to someone better at semantics.

>>     Can a user request that it not be done?
>   xu lo pilno ka'e cpedu lenu na go'a

Seems okay to me.

>>     Were I stronger, I would have lifted it myself.
>   ganai mi tsamau da'i gi mipu pamei .ia lafti

The "pamei lafti" tanru looks very prone to misinterpretation, and in a
situation like this I'd prefer the clause model:

lenu mi tsamau da'i cu nibli (/rinka?/) lenu mi ka'e lafti

Could use something to indicate the "myself" (I don't trust that tanru),
other details could be fixed up.  A more English way of looking at it might
build a lujvo meaning "enable".  Uuhh, how 'bout "ka'enri'a": x1 enables x2
to do/be x3 ....

lenu mi tsamau da'i cu ka'enri'a mi lenu [mi] lafti

I dunno how good that lujvo is, and it's got cleft places, and the whole
way or looking at it is English, but there's an idea.

~mark
      o o     o   o             o o   o     o        o   o     o o
              o                       o o   o      o       o     o
  o   o     o     o         o     o     o   o      o     o     o     N2KOT
Mark E. Shoulson:  shoulson@ctr.columbia.edu