Quantified Statements To English The problem I am working on is:
Translate these statements into English, where C(x) is “x is a comedian” and F(x) is “x is funny” and the domain consists of all people.
a) $∀x(C(x)→F(x))$ 
b)$∀x(C(x)∧F(x))$
c) $∃x(C(x)→F(x))$ 
d)$∃x(C(x)∧F(x))$
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are my answers:
For a): For every person, if they are a comedian, then they are funny.
For b): For every person, they are both a comedian and funny.
For c): There exists a person who, if he is funny, is a comedian
For d): There exists a person who is funny and is a comedian.
Here are the books answers:
a)Every comedian is funny. 
b)Every person is a funny comedian. 
c)There exists a person such that if she or he is a comedian, then she or he is funny. 
d)Some comedians are funny. 
Does the meaning of my answers seem to be in harmony with the meaning of the answers given in the solution manual? The reason I ask is because part a), for instance, is a implication, and "Every comedian is funny," does not appear to be an implication.

The homework question said "Translate these statements into English". And that means normal English, such as a native English speaker might use. Now, is

For every person, if they are a comedian, then they are funny.

normal English in that sense? Would you ever say that sort of thing outside the logic classroom?? Of course not!
What you have written down is a Logic-English mix (Loglish if you like), with something of the syntactic structure of the language of first-order logic, and the vocabulary of English. Now, that's a very useful thing to do as a half-way house, using Loglish as a bridge between FOL and English. But it is only a half-way house. You now need to ask: how would you say much the same thing (as far as truth-conditions are concerned) in normal English? The book answer gets that right.
