WikiDiscuss

WikiDiscuss


Wiki page unless changed

posts: 2388


<rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 09:06:49PM -0500, Mark
> E. Shoulson wrote:
> > Jorge "Llamb??as" wrote:
> >
> > >In Spanish, the equivalent construct "X a
> menos que Y", always
> > >requires Y to be put in the subjunctive
> mood.
> > >
> > >I'm not convinced "unless" can be a purely
> truth conditional OR.
> > >I don't want to say that "I am mortal,
> unless you are mortal" is
> > >true, even though "I am mortal OR you are
> mortal" is.
> > >
> > >"Unless" would seem to require its
> complement to be either false
> > >or very unlikely/exceptional.
> >
> >
> > Why? Sure, you *can* use "unless" that way.
> But it's also quite
> > commonly used to mean "if not..."
> >
> > There'll be a game on Thursday, unless it
> rains. (not necessarily very
> > unlikely!)
>
> Re-read what he said again: Either false *OR*
> exceptional.

But then, it doesn't have to be false either.
But it is marked off in some way to prevent
conversion: "It rains Thursday unless there is a
game."

> This started because I insisted that "da'i"
> should be used for the
> second half of the clause, because it may or
> may not have happened
> or ever happen. PC argued, and xorxes got in
> to it with him.

We are agreed more or less that the "unless"
component needs marking off, but are of different
minds about how strong that mark need be. I
think we agree that full world- constructing
{da'i} is stronger than needed, xorxes wants it
stronger than I think is necessary. I would now
go with just the distinguishing mark of "but"
over "and," {ku'i} — expanding its meaning
somewhat, to be sure.