From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Thu Dec 11 15:51:34 2008 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:51:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LAvJe-0000RE-Oi for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:51:34 -0800 Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.128.188]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LAvJb-0000Qa-BB for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:51:34 -0800 Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 18so757724fks.2 for ; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:51:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender :to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references :x-google-sender-auth; bh=ZIX5D9sAj4WYlW6F62PFPziMa3bi/ndpGM8lR6bLcbo=; b=LKwjJXyA9s0oDhtgQeSp99xNnci+2LbHoz44XMJF+4b9Ux0SeIJNpflr2w+mCYGD1o nXZ15N3KxptrdfSKTLmu/wjzphU4qyJIWCkzydcb6Lle+/BqjJiN0Vw06pfsMpGksI/3 fbZNLTtv9FyvhAQ2xY2YGmYIDitOJbjPUTpNI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=JwTMzjzUC2kbOv6mhr2isdOOIrCpDhOWZrNlCwyOZ+nMzMWnbW4iDCYJ1Tl5pC3Cf5 vb7/IlSGuth4hUTon36Yzx2EEv34JXMtzp6R5+/aKE6pzNsodmZYmB1RjalJG/20qy9A jSQj+oksm2X/+M2F9jYLgG6QRoWdXyep3Yn9k= Received: by 10.223.113.136 with SMTP id a8mr3630009faq.76.1229039156735; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:45:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.119.1 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:45:56 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <12d58c160812111545g4bdce2caj623c6647b62b014e@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:45:56 -0500 From: "komfo,amonan" To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: attitudinals question In-Reply-To: <467245c20812111520p4b9512aex50717c3379f27f1@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_111216_4915063.1229039156711" References: <5715b9300812111452h2771b99cnffea157a0484adfb@mail.gmail.com> <467245c20812111515j4ac4338fs3b4f8ca43fc2c1f@mail.gmail.com> <467245c20812111520p4b9512aex50717c3379f27f1@mail.gmail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 674bf41f78668761 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 X-Spam-Score-Int: 0 X-Spam-Bar: / X-archive-position: 1085 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: komfoamonan@gmail.com Precedence: bulk Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org X-list: lojban-beginners ------=_Part_111216_4915063.1229039156711 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 6:20 PM, pyrosim wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Luke Bergen > wrote: > > > > Is it legitimate to use attitudinals as regular words? ie. is the > following lojban sentence acceptable? > > > > xu do .ui > > > > or does this just mean \"are you \"? > > > > - Luke Bergen > My naive thought would be that the .ui would bond to the whole > sentence and the xu would bond to the do, leaving \"How do you feel > about yourself? :)\" I think the sentence you are looking for is \"xu > .ui dai\". Attitudinals are usually attributed to the speaker, unless > otherwise specified (using dai). That sentence doesn\'t have a selbri, > but I believe it is a valid utterance nonetheless. I could be wrong > though. > -Dylan You've got it backwards. UI attach to the preceding word or structure; if it appears at the beginning it applies to the whole bridi (See Reference Grammar 13:1 ). If, in speaking, you don't realize you wish to express a full-bridi UI until you've already started, you can close the bridi with {vau} & then add the UI to similar effect. The question word for UI is {pei}, so {.ui pei} translates loosely to "Are you happy?" (See Reference Grammar 13:10 .) mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan ------=_Part_111216_4915063.1229039156711 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 6:20 PM, pyrosim <pyrosim@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Is it legitimate to use attitudinals as regular words?  ie. is the following lojban sentence acceptable?
>
> xu do .ui
>
> or does this just mean \"are you <I\'m happy>\"?
>
> - Luke Bergen
 
My naive thought would be that the .ui would bond to the whole
sentence and the xu would bond to the do, leaving \"How do you feel
about yourself? :)\" I think the sentence you are looking for is \"xu
.ui dai\". Attitudinals are usually attributed to the speaker, unless
otherwise specified (using dai). That sentence doesn\'t have a selbri,
but I believe it is a valid utterance nonetheless. I could be wrong
though.
-Dylan

You've got it backwards. UI attach to the preceding word or structure; if it appears at the beginning it applies to the whole bridi (See Reference Grammar 13:1). If, in speaking, you don't realize you wish to express a full-bridi UI until you've already started, you can close the bridi with {vau} & then add the UI to similar effect.

The question word for UI is {pei}, so {.ui pei} translates loosely to "Are you happy?" (See Reference Grammar 13:10.)

mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan
------=_Part_111216_4915063.1229039156711--