27

I would be especially interested in Indo-European languages or other common language families, but failing that, I would be very interested if it exists at all, because it is an important distinction in formal discourse, but can almost always be taken from context in informal speech.

curiousdannii
  • 6,193
  • 5
  • 26
  • 48
Phira
  • 1,425
  • 15
  • 25

9 Answers9

17

Yes, Basque (in the batua dialect) has ala "or (exclusive)" and edo "or (inclusive)", although ala can only be used in questions.

You may also be interested in the WALS maps of languages with an Inclusive/Exclusive Distinction in Independent Pronouns and an Inclusive/Exclusive Distinction in Verbal Inflection.

Alek Storm
  • 1,842
  • 18
  • 16
  • 3
    just curious, are those inclusion/exclusion distinctions that you link related to the or distinction in some way? – Louis Rhys Nov 02 '11 at 12:07
  • @LouisRhys What do you mean? They're related in that they exhibit an inclusive/exclusive distinction. – Alek Storm Nov 02 '11 at 17:28
13

In Finnish, tai is inclusive, vai exclusive, and eli is for an equivalence.

E.g.

Haluaisitko omenia tai päärynöitä?

"Would you like some apples or pears?

Haluatko omenan, vai päärynän?

"Do you want an apple, or a pear?"

Se on hyvän- ja pahantiedon puun hedelmä, eli omena.

"It's the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and bad, or an apple."

Daniel Briggs
  • 2,071
  • 17
  • 16
  • Does the tai/vai distinction appear only in interrogatives? – Armen Tsirunyan Jan 11 '16 at 10:27
  • 3
    Yes, it is restricted to interrogative clauses. This also includes indirect interrogatives, e.g. Siinä ei ole väliä, onko sinulla omenia vai päärynöitä "It isn't important whether you have apples or pears." – user8017 Aug 16 '17 at 00:17
6

Not sure about other languages, but I know that Latin made this distinction:

In Latin they had several different words for these different 'ors'. AUT was generally exclusive, VEL inclusive, as was -VE on the end of a word, whilst the 'or' of equivalence was denoted by SIVE or SEU

Source

Alex Peattie
  • 377
  • 1
  • 2
  • Do you know some examples to illustrate the usage? It would be great – Louis Rhys Nov 02 '11 at 07:00
  • 14
    I'm afraid I can't entirely support this. Aut is usually a more emphatic word than the others (which, incidentally, are related both etymologically and semantically). Because exclusive or is more often used in emphatic sentences, there is perhaps a greater chance that aut will be exclusive than vel etc.; but the correlation is not very strong, and certainly not reliable. Especially not with negations: numquam videbam Romam aut Athenas: "I have never seen Rome or Athens". See The Myth of Vel and Aut‎ from the SEP. – Cerberus Nov 02 '11 at 10:55
  • Very interesting, thank you for enlightening me! – Alex Peattie Nov 03 '11 at 05:10
  • @Cerberus That article no longer supports your comment. Do you have anything up to date on that? (Disjunction in negative clauses also act differently from those in positive clauses.) – cmw May 02 '22 at 21:28
  • @cmw: Err I could have raised a child since that post...I do not remember anything about this! – Cerberus May 02 '22 at 21:57
  • @cmw It does still support the comment, though I don’t know if it went into more detail formerly. In the section on inclusive/exclusive disjunction in language, it states that aut has been shown to have non-exclusive uses, which is exactly what Cerberus was saying. – Janus Bahs Jacquet May 05 '22 at 14:17
  • @JanusBahsJacquet "Some" uses is different from a weak correlation, and certainly different from calling it a myth. I was hoping he knew of a quick reference that debunks the old idea. Unfortunately, that article only cites a single example in a negative clause, so it remains a question whether possum habere hoc aut illud is/was solely disjunctive. I'll track down Dik and Jennings later to see if they can provide some illumination on that front. – cmw May 05 '22 at 15:16
5

In many European languages we can modify the "or" word by prefixing with "either" to make it exclusive, as in "You must chose either a or b" (explicitly not both).

But without modification it's inclusive or exclusive depending on context: "Left or right?" is exclusive since "both" is not "possible" (usually), while "Milk or sugar?" is inclusive because "both" is possible and quite common.

PS: As a programmer I'd really like the languages to have words for inclusive-or and exclusive-or clearly defined... ;)

Christian
  • 788
  • 8
  • 22
Stein G. Strindhaug
  • 151
  • 3
  • I suppose the english OR is inclusive. Why do so many people write "and/or"? – Weltschmerz Nov 02 '11 at 23:08
  • 4
    English "or" is ambiguous. Sometimes it's used to mean OR, sometimes it's used to mean XOR. For instance, if a menu offers "fries or chips" as part of a combo, I'll probably assume that it means "fries XOR chips" and that I can't ask for both. So if you're an extra-generous restaurant owner and you would be willing to let me order both for the same price, you can write "fries and/or chips," and that makes your generosity unambiguous. – Leah Velleman Nov 03 '11 at 03:13
  • If English "or" were ambiguous and sometimes meant XOR, then "Alex or Bill or Charles" would have a reading where it means "one or three of (Alex, Bill, Charles)". [The observation is due to Reichenbach and McCawley. See Alonso-Ovalle's thesis (pp.56ff) for a nice exposition: http://alonso-ovalle.net/index.php?page_id=28.] – Kai von Fintel Nov 03 '11 at 22:57
  • 1
    @KaivonFintel: Broken link. – Mechanical snail Dec 12 '12 at 13:58
  • http://people.linguistics.mcgill.ca/~luis.alonso-ovalle/papers/alonso-ovalle-diss.pdf – Fibo Kowalsky Dec 29 '19 at 20:33
  • 1

    If English "or" were ambiguous and sometimes meant XOR, then "Alex or Bill or Charles" would have a reading where it means "one or three of (Alex, Bill, Charles)"

    I mean, "or" between NPs, unlike "and" between NPs, does not have a mereological sense. It doesn't stop it from being either OR or XOR depending on context; "Alex or Bill or Charles came" can indeed mean "came(Alex) XOR came(Bill) XOR came(Charles)" (or, at least, its Russian equivalent can). The question of whether XOR is scalar implicature or a genuine polysemy is unrelated.

     – Viridianus Sep 25 '21 at 09:59
3

I think the closest thing you can get in natural languages the distinction between choice-aimed and simple alternative. Finnish and Basque have already been mentioned, and here are some more:

There are, however, 9 European languages that do not have any general marker for alternative, but show two distinct connectives for choice-aimed alternative and simple alternative relations. These languages are Polish (choice-aimed: czy, simple: lub/albo), Finnish (choice-aimed: vai, simple: tai), Belorussian (choice-aimed: ci, simple: abo), Albanian (choice-aimed: apo, simple: ose), Basque (choice-aimed: ala, simple: edo), Ukrainian (choice-aimed: čy, simple: abo), Georgian (choice-aimed: tu, simple: an), Lezgian (choice-based: tax̂ajt'a, simple: ja/wa-ja), Dargi (choice-aimed: aħi, simple: ya-ra).

This distinction is also present in Mandarin Chinese: choice-aimed alternatives use 還是 háishì and simple alternatives use 或者 huòzhě.

Note that Polish, Belorussian, Ukrainian and Albanian are all Indo-European, just like you wanted.

michau
  • 1,779
  • 15
  • 20
  • Albanian apo is used exclusively in questions, ose exclusively in statements/suggestions. – Marin Nov 09 '16 at 01:48
3

Just to coin one more way to express inclusive OR versus exclusive OR.

In Ukrainian, we use "or X, or Y" construct to denote exclusivity:

дай мені яблуко або помаранч — "give me an apple or an orange", inclusive;
дай мені або яблуко, або помаранч — "give me either an apple or an orange", exclusive.

Be Brave Be Like Ukraine
  • 8,629
  • 9
  • 38
  • 66
2

In Arabic (classical) ʼam is exclusive, ʼaw is (generally) inclusive.

fdb
  • 24,134
  • 1
  • 35
  • 70
  • 1
    Yes! And the distinction is also technically present for interrogative sentences in Modern Standard Arabic, although the average writer today will more often than not be found using ’aw for all purposes, introducing the same ambiguity as with "or" in English. – hallo Dec 01 '17 at 17:52
2

In Azerbaijani language there are separate connectives for both inclusive and exclusive ors.

VƏ YA — inclusive or

YA DA — exclusive or

Qapını ört ya da bağla — Close or open the door (exclusive sense)

Çantalarınızı və ya zənbillırinizi masanın üzərinə qoyun — Put your bags or packages on the table (inclusive sense)

But in non-formal speech "ya da" is used more frequently. And the interesting fact is that inclusive or "və ya" is literally translated as "and or" (which is true including third case, when A and B are both true).

Turkhan Badalov
  • 121
  • 1
1

Let us understand the structure of XOR through boolean logic.

A XOR B is (A OR B) AND NOT (A AND B )

Assuming that inclusive OR appears in languages first... XOR could be obtained by applying a further condition to the OzR clause as is done by AND above...

This condition is imposed by . Either .in English. . 'Ya' . in Hindi interestingly inclusive OR is also Ya in Hindi.

This is derived from Sanskrit 'Va'... and as per Sanskrit grammer a repetition of this word suggests exclusion (Learn Sanskrit Online: "And," "Or," and "Not").

So the basic point is that the truth table for XOR can be realized by filtering out the truth table for OR and interestingly most languages make use of this mechanism instead of having a separate XOR operator (word).

ARi
  • 580
  • 1
  • 3
  • 17