imperatives

[Goran Topic <topic@STUDENT.MATH.HR>]

> To indicate who the request is aimed at, the attitudinal can be
> placed after the sumti:
>
>         la kim cu cismyfra do e'o
>         That Kim smile at you, I ask you.
>
> That is still something strange to say, since the agent here is Kim,
> so it is strange to ask you that she smile. It's like saying "be smiled
> at by Kim".

Why? I find it perfectly valid in lojban. To get at the 'agent' you have
to reach into deep case theory, and I don't remember anybody relating
lojban with Fillmore.

I don't find di'e chain of reasoning unreasonable, pei?

I ask you that Kim smiles at you.
I ask you that it happens that Kim smiles at you.
I ask you to do the best you can for Kim to smile at you.
Make Kim smile at you.
Make funny faces, or wiggle your pinky, or do anything else you think is
  appropriate, so that Kim would smile at you.

ta'o did you read The Little Prince (is that correct?) by Antoine de
Saint Exupery (sp?) There was a conversation between a king and the main
character that looked more or less like this (I can't find the book right
now, I'm doing this by memory):

.i le cmanolbe'a cu senci

.i cu'u le nolraitru lu
   .i .o'onai mi punai curmi lenu do senpi li'u
.i cu'u le cmanolbe'a lu
   .i lenu mi senpi cu selbai gi'eseki'ubo sarcu li'u
.i cu'u le nolraitru lu
   .i lenu do senpi cu sarcu xu .i .i'a seni'ibo .e'oga'i do senpi li'u
.i cu'u le cmanolbe'a lu
   .i ku'i mi ca na kakne lenu senpi li'u
.i cu'u le nolraitru lu
   .i .o'onairo'a ku'i do puzi senpi .ije mi minde do lenu senpi li'u
.i cu'u le cmanolbe'a lu
   .i mi senpi ri'a le da'i nu sarcu kei .enai lenu mi djica li'u
.i cu'u le nolraitru lu
   .i .ua .i ni'i la'e di'u fau lenu lenu senpi cu sarcu kei ko senpi
   .ije fau lenu lenu senpi na sarcu kei ko na senpi li'u

Do you really think that in "mi senpi", I am the actor? pe'i I am a
patient. That doesn't stop the king from ordering me not to sneeze, and
it makes just as much sense as ordering somebody to be smiled at. That
is not under sy. control, or at least not completely, but there is
nothing impossible in the request itself, even if its fulfillment
logically can not really be expected.

--
GAT/CS/O d?@ H s:-@ !g p1(2)@ !au(0?) a- w+(+++) (!)v-@(+) C++(++++)
UU/H(+) P++>++++ L(>+) !3 E>++ N+ K(+) W--(---) M-- !V(--) -po+ Y(+)
t+@(+++) !5 !j R+@ G-@(J++) tv+(++) b++@ D++ B? e+* u@ h!$ f?(+) r--
!n(+@) y+. GeekCode v2.1, modifications left to reader to puzzle out