Received: from mail-yx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.213.189]:48733) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1T7ntn-0000ze-Fs; Sat, 01 Sep 2012 06:38:21 -0700 Received: by yenq11 with SMTP id q11sf3467745yen.16 for ; Sat, 01 Sep 2012 06:38:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=yMJRIZHxmH3h9bl2pMOEVRkqzcYUzgiJtc7hC2jH7ZQ=; b=VmjHPg7CFaVHFz0VOYiveEHrzaYHNttBFW06BJnvoR36pYMIN6uH/dfcKjeyIrkuyb AD5+xXNiSug35Lwtq+A1e+f6wjOYvwAfi99Gr/RXc4DRUf7rCkjqO73uj2+AWNBCwlud aBzjP3jzg5zvLDk+ygAF3suE0zhWMNkSBFp2AKHMXPOhPLNT7UfJd7MqUems2KRvf78Q YzgECvR4BgVOIn9N+VXTrlshVpxI/Wyo6oz8eAvCgGnybqUCwj38OyU98D+lnQEYkLSU 2fWjkpM63kU2d6n8xeWILkRTGlvZxgU5wpwfNRlpHsoffLzV3IjxeVb+pvd0/JL1BNyU LYSA== Received: by 10.236.175.1 with SMTP id y1mr74275yhl.9.1346506680976; Sat, 01 Sep 2012 06:38:00 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.236.44.174 with SMTP id n34ls6156441yhb.4.gmail; Sat, 01 Sep 2012 06:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.236.201.134 with SMTP id b6mr1095950yho.15.1346506680428; Sat, 01 Sep 2012 06:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 06:37:59 -0700 (PDT) From: triliyn To: lojban@googlegroups.com Message-Id: <1b189a5d-34a1-40be-9b40-a003ff1ad06a@googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <2a7beba8-e0dd-42f4-a641-a0dace5a2e4d@googlegroups.com> References: <8d3fb774-f4ff-4b86-afa2-df153de2f633@googlegroups.com> <10cd53d6-5aa9-40be-a1f9-2f5ad3115159@googlegroups.com> <2a7beba8-e0dd-42f4-a641-a0dace5a2e4d@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: Is there any real diffrence between hope (.a'o) and desire (.au)? MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: trillionalyssa@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: ls.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of trillionalyssa@gmail.com designates internal as permitted sender) smtp.mail=trillionalyssa@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_1219_229748.1346506679938" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_bar: / ------=_Part_1219_229748.1346506679938 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I've always thought of {sei} as introducing a comment about the text without regard for the meaning of the text. For example, you could say {broda sei mu da lerfu}, and {broda sei xlali} should be taken to mean "I think {broda} was a bad word choice". On Saturday, September 1, 2012 8:26:28 AM UTC-4, la gleki wrote: > > > > On Saturday, September 1, 2012 4:03:52 PM UTC+4, tijlan wrote: >> >> On 30 August 2012 17:32, la gleki wrote: >> > Can't we clearly define UI in terms of {sei broda} after all? >> > So you are saying that {.a'o}={sei kanpe je djica}, right? >> >> {a'o} and {kanpe je djica} seem to generally mean the same kind of >> emotion, yes. >> >> Some notes: >> {ui} is a direct expression of happiness, whereas {(zo'e) gleki} is a >> descriptive statement that someone feels / felt / will feel happiness >> -- same emotion, different functions. Also, with {ui}, the experiencer >> is the speaker by default; with {sei gleki}, it can be non-speakers. >> {sei gleki} can be used to translate adverbial stuff, such as >> "happily", whose explicit or implicit subject (x1) can be other than >> the speaker. So, the {sei broda} form cannot always substitute for or >> define UI. >> > > Well, I guess {.ei=sei bilga} not {.ei=sei mi bilga} ? > I want all UI-cmavo translated to {sei ko'a broda} form. > > > >> >> > Can you also derive {.ai} from {.au}? >> >> Does {ai} always imply {au}? Probably not. One can intend but not want >> to pay a tax. >> Does {au} always imply {ai}? Probably not. One can want but not intend >> to go to Mars. >> >> >> mu'o >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/7bozf9oQjSwJ. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en. ------=_Part_1219_229748.1346506679938 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've always thought of {sei} as introducing a comment about the text withou= t regard for the meaning of the text. For example, you could say {broda sei= mu da lerfu}, and {broda sei xlali} should be taken to mean "I think {brod= a} was a bad word choice".

On Saturday, September 1, 2012 8:26:28 AM= UTC-4, la gleki wrote:

On Saturday, September 1, 2012 4:03:52 PM UTC+4, tijlan wrote:
On 30 August 2012 17:32, la gleki <gleki.= is...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can't we clearly define UI in terms of {sei broda} after all?
> So you are saying that {.a'o}=3D{sei kanpe je djica}, right?

{a'o} and {kanpe je djica} seem to generally mean the same kind of emot= ion, yes.

Some notes:
{ui} is a direct expression of happiness, whereas {(zo'e) gleki} is a
descriptive statement that someone feels / felt / will feel happiness
-- same emotion, different functions. Also, with {ui}, the experiencer
is the speaker by default; with {sei gleki}, it can be non-speakers.
{sei gleki} can be used to translate adverbial stuff, such as
"happily", whose explicit or implicit subject (x1) can be other than
the speaker. So, the {sei broda} form cannot always substitute for or
define UI.
 
Well, I guess {.ei=3Dsei bilga} not = {.ei=3Dsei mi bilga} ?
I want all UI-cmavo translated to {sei ko'= a broda} form.




> Can you also derive {.ai} from {.au}?

Does {ai} always imply {au}? Probably not. One can intend but not want
to pay a tax.
Does {au} always imply {ai}? Probably not. One can want but not intend
to go to Mars.


mu'o

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/lojban/-/7b= ozf9oQjSwJ.
=20 To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
------=_Part_1219_229748.1346506679938--