WikiDiscuss

pc:
> --- And Rosta <a.rosta@v21.me.uk> wrote:
> > Consider English "There is at least one cure
> > for AIDS, and
> > we discussed it". That entails or very very
> > strongly
> > implicates that one can go out into the world
> > and find
> > at least one cure for AIDS. "We discussed at
> > least one
> > cure for AIDS" doesn't imply that the AIDS cure
> > is
> > necessarily real. So the two English sentences
> > seem not
> > to be synonymous. But the Lojban equivalents
> > are
> > synonymous, and are equivalent to English "We
> > discussed
> > at least one AIDS cure". So I want to know how
> > to render
> > in Lojban the English "There is at least one
> > AIDS cure,
> > and we discussed it".
> >
> > To reiterate (for the sake of anyone else
> > reading this), I
> > am not saying that it is the job of *xorlo* to
> > provide a
> > way of translating "There is at least one AIDS
> > cure,
> > and we discussed it". Rather, I'm saying that
> > one would
> > like Lojban to have a way of translating it,
> > and that
> > xorlo happens not to provide it.
>
> What I mean by saying that xorlo seems to be a
> "fix" that destroys an unbroken system:
> {da cure — seems nearly impossible to say for a
> material rather than a doctor la aids ije mia
> casnu da} v. {mi'a casnu tu'a lo cure be la
> aids} (using the intensional object rather than
> the intensional place method.

But we discuss the cure, not the abstraction. And
what would be the abstraction that tu'a abbreviates?
Or is {tu'a} just a marker showing that the discussee
does not necessarily exist (at least as a cure) in
the same world as the discussion?

--And.