Return-path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_DKIM_INVALID,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Personal-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on chain.digitalkingdom.org Envelope-to: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Delivery-date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:44:02 -0700 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([192.168.123.127]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OyBYs-0006W7-8I; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:43:42 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list jbovlaste); Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:43:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OyBYS-0006W1-8m for jbovlaste-real@lojban.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:43:16 -0700 Received: from mail-qw0-f53.google.com ([209.85.216.53]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OyBYN-0006Vl-6J for jbovlaste@lojban.org; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:43:16 -0700 Received: by qwe5 with SMTP id 5so5742292qwe.40 for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:43:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=81YDBx74KMaqBrCUMxvp32Jx1TrGHSDZUiUaXZ3fn6w=; b=QRysduvKBwh9UQHtkvmoxSuvfgF7B44jtJHgB7Zd1uUE0Z1/qzoX7HDwcZoRHgDShv AxWHKOtW6Pk9mADMXEpSCb4GdqiRqhq4/ms0bxQv/37D4s2Ri6P6bqmLpsCpm3/jjFvJ NovC4072M6YlhIF7ByJ13DvrN/+bXakUuG34k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=fvgJ0um2BlaD8pBAJvxMYJMZS9/WDr4/69UU6sv0o8LDTmM+9CETtYp1yyZhsdPNAC jJeshoc6k0ds8VpgvuG3UjS2ddoZra91sgJI9BGhJiSpD5XTdSGjDe06Z67o0jPkCHjO kn96o/7x2Ljx+aHbijnve7qYyffWJtsFug61Y= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.45.22 with SMTP id c22mr7435092qaf.103.1285108985025; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:43:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.85.3 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:43:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <7531.25333.qm@web88004.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <705787.13348.qm@web88006.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <680042.9852.qm@web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 18:43:04 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: [jbovlaste] Re: Alice in Wonderland 08 From: Michael Turniansky To: jbovlaste@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00c09fa21cb48cdbca0490ccc01f X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: jbovlaste-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: mturniansky@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: jbovlaste@lojban.org X-list: jbovlaste Content-Length: 10656 Lines: 239 --00c09fa21cb48cdbca0490ccc01f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 2010/9/21 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Michael Turniansky > wrote: > > > > The reason that the x3 exists is simple. It's English-centric. When > > thinking about the concept expressed by the English words "wish", "hope= " > and > > "expect", (and for that matter "dread") the jbobau team realized that t= he > > three terms were identical in one respect, that x1 believes that a futu= re > > event x2 will come to pass. They differ in another respect -- the > > subjective reality that x2 will in fact come to pass. So by adding the > x3, > > we can distinguish between three English words with one lojbannic word. > > That's what the note in the gi'uste definition says, but it's not even > a good analysis of the English words, especially of "expect". > > First, "hope", "wish" and "expect" don't have to be about future events: > > They can easily be about past events: > > I hope you had a good time. > I wish you had had a good time. > I expect you had a good time. > > Or present events: > > I hope she's home. > I wish she were home. > I expect she's home. > > What is required of hope and expect is that the one who hopes/expects > does not know for sure whether the event in question has taken place, > is taking place or will take place. For future events this is usually > almost automatically true, so hope and expect are often used with > future events. But they can be used just as easily with present and > past events of unknown certainty. > Fair enough > > Wish is different, for "wish" the speaker usually does know that the > event in question has not taken place or is not taking place. That's > why "wish" is hard to use with the future, because the future is > relatively uncertain. Wish requires some certainty that the event does > not take place. > > I wish my son would be discharged from the army in time for Xmas I wish I get "Death Raiders of the Easter Bunny 2020" for my birthday. I wish there would be no more wars. How is that "hard to use with the future"? > Wish and hope are about events that the wisher/hoper finds desirable: > impossible and possible events respectively. The third possibility, > for events that are certain, the corresponding word is not "expect" > but something like "be glad": > > But I asserted that pacna does not HAVE to be positive. That's why I included "dread" in there for low prob. (Also, "fear" for higher probability). In that respect it's much like dimna. Unmarked, it's emotion-neutral, I aver. And that's why "expect" DOES belong. The important part of it is that makes it different from senpi/[kanpe]/birti is that the event is more in an Eigenstate of not having a truth value yet, either because it has not happened or, if I concede your POV, the observer doesn't know whether or not it has happened. And it refers to EVENTS, not FACTS. I can doubt (senpi) that snow is white even if everyone tells me it's wrong. I wish she were home (I know she is not, probability of her being home =3D = 0) > I hope she is home (I don't know whether she is or not, probability > more than 0 and less than 1) > I'm glad she is home (I know she is, probability of her being home =3D 1) > > In all three cases the wisher/hoper/glad one finds her being home > preferrable to her not being home. > > "Expect" has nothing to do with preference. I can expect her to be > home but not care one way or the other whether she is or not, and it > is not about high certainty either, I can have a very low expectation > of her being home. "Expect" is just about estimating a probability, > and has very little to do with the possitive attitude towards the > event that "pacna" is about. That's why we needed "kanpe", which is > not about having a positive or negative attitude about the event. (I > have no idea why the silly note from "pacna" was copied into the > definition of "kanpe" though). > > So we have the triplet djica/pacna/gleki for positive attitude towards > an impossible/possible/certain event respectively. > > And we have senpi/kanpe/birti for the estimation of the > possibility/certainty of an event, regardless of whether we find the > event desirable, undesirable, or whether we have a neutral attitude > towards it. (senpi is not strictly probability zero, but rather a low > probability). > > > --gejyspa --00c09fa21cb48cdbca0490ccc01f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2010/9/21 Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <jjllambias@gmail.com>
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Michael Turniansky
<mturniansky@gmail.com> = wrote:
>
> =C2=A0 The reason that the x3 exists is simple.=C2=A0 It's English= -centric.=C2=A0 When
> thinking about the concept expressed by the English words "wish&q= uot;, "hope" and
> "expect", (and for that matter "dread") the jbobau= team realized that the
> three terms were identical in one respect, that x1 believes that a fut= ure
> event x2=C2=A0will come to pass.=C2=A0 They differ in another respect = -- the
> subjective reality that x2 will in fact come to pass.=C2=A0 So by addi= ng the x3,
> we can distinguish between three English words with one lojbannic word= .

That's what the note in the gi'uste definition says, but it&#= 39;s not even
a good analysis of the English words, especially of "expect".

First, "hope", "wish" and "expect" don't = have to be about future events:

They can easily be about past events:

=C2=A0I hope you had a good time.
=C2=A0I wish you had had a good time.
=C2=A0I expect you had a good time.

Or present events:

=C2=A0I hope she's home.
=C2=A0I wish she were home.
=C2=A0I expect she's home.

What is required of hope and expect is that the one who hopes/expects
does not know for sure whether the event in question has taken place,
is taking place or will take place. For future events this is usually
almost automatically true, so hope and expect are often used with
future events. But they can be used just as easily with present and
past events of unknown certainty.

=C2=A0Fair enoug= h

Wish is different, for "wish" the speaker usually does know that = the
event in question has not taken place or is not taking place. That's why "wish" is hard to use with the future, because the future is<= br> relatively uncertain. Wish requires some certainty that the event does
not take place.

=C2=A0 I wish my son would be discharged from the arm= y in time for Xmas
=C2=A0 I wish I get "Death Raiders of the Easter= Bunny 2020" for my birthday.
=C2=A0 I wish there would be no more = wars.

=C2=A0 How is that "hard to use with the future"?
=C2=A0
=
Wish and hope are about events that the wisher/hoper finds desirable:
impossible and possible events respectively. The third possibility,
for events that are certain, the corresponding word is not "expect&quo= t;
but something like "be glad":

=C2=A0
=C2=A0 But I asserted that pacna does not = HAVE to be positive.=C2=A0 That's why I included "dread" in t= here for low prob.=C2=A0 (Also, "fear" for higher probability).= =C2=A0 In that respect it's much like dimna.=C2=A0 Unmarked, it's e= motion-neutral, I aver.=C2=A0 And that's why "expect" DOES be= long.=C2=A0 The important part of it is that makes it different from senpi/= [kanpe]/birti is that the event is more in an Eigenstate of not having a tr= uth value yet, either because it has not happened or, if I concede your POV= , the observer doesn't know whether or not it has happened.=C2=A0 And i= t refers to EVENTS, not FACTS.=C2=A0 I can doubt (senpi) that snow is white= even if everyone tells me it's wrong.

I wish she were home (I know she is not, probability of her being home =3D = 0)
I hope she is home (I don't know whether she is or not, probability
more than 0 and less than 1)
I'm glad she is home (I know she is, probability of her being home =3D = 1)

In all three cases the wisher/hoper/glad one finds her being home
preferrable to her not being home.

"Expect" has nothing to do with preference. I can expect her to b= e
home but not care one way or the other whether she is or not, and it
is not about high certainty either, I can have a very low expectation
of her being home. "Expect" is just about estimating a probabilit= y,
and has very little to do with the possitive attitude towards the
event that "pacna" is about. That's why we needed "kanpe= ", which is
not about having a positive or negative attitude about the event. (I
have no idea why the silly note from "pacna" was copied into the<= br> definition of "kanpe" though).

So we have the triplet djica/pacna/gleki for positive attitude towards
an impossible/possible/certain event respectively.

And we have senpi/kanpe/birti for the estimation of the
possibility/certainty of an event, regardless of whether we find the
event desirable, undesirable, or whether we have a neutral attitude
towards it. (senpi is not strictly probability zero, but rather a low
probability).


=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 --gejyspa
=C2=A0=

--00c09fa21cb48cdbca0490ccc01f--