From jjllambias@hotmail.com Fri Aug 25 14:26:55 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24316 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2000 21:26:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 25 Aug 2000 21:26:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.240.173) by mta1 with SMTP; 25 Aug 2000 21:26:54 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 14:26:53 -0700 Received: from 200.49.74.2 by lw8fd.law8.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP; Fri, 25 Aug 2000 GMT X-Originating-IP: [200.49.74.2] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] skudji Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 21:26:53 GMT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Aug 2000 21:26:53.0707 (UTC) FILETIME=[3048ADB0:01C00EDB] From: "Jorge Llambias" la deiv cusku di'e >tolnutsku (to'e + snuti + cusku) > >x1 (agent) intentionally expresses/means to say x2 (sedu'u/text/lu'e >concept) for audience x3 via expressive medium x4 But "intentionally say" is not the same thing as "intend to say". When someone says "I meant to say X" they are accepting that they may not actually have said X, but if they say "I intentionally said X" then they are claiming to have said X. So the lujvo should not be "intensional-say" but "say-intend". A kind of intending, not a kind of saying. Now I would prefer {skudji} over {skuseltolsnuti} just on the grounds of ease of use, but even the meaning of {skuseltolsnuti} is not quite right. {se tolsnuti} would be "x1 does x2 intentionally/on purpose". But we need "x1 intends that x2 happen". Not the same thing. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com