Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 03:23:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: la gleki <gleki.is.my.name@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <a44b176d-3c36-467e-994a-f5ff934f11fb@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <51814383.9040605@lojban.org>
References: <20130429163424.GP10220@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> <517EA2D8.4000206@gmx.de> <20130430195657.GM10220@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> <17c5855e-538c-41bd-b1d9-ce5fc57fe533@googlegroups.com> <20130501105413.GP10220@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> <51811B75.4030106@lojban.org> <CALm==BX+FXGh6tzJEBXRi5QEOBzmy-x_ZZvruzdpMMDp2yGCOQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <51814383.9040605@lojban.org>
Subject: Re: Robin does the xorban (was Re: [lojban] Baby Words: "you're
 right" and orders.)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_204_3996726.1367490225929"
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

------=_Part_204_3996726.1367490225929
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1


On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 8:32:03 PM UTC+4, lojbab wrote:
>
> .arpis. wrote: 
> > Are constraint (e'i) and obligation (ei) such different concepts that we 
> > want two separate short words for them, especially at the expense of 
> > having a short way to be explicit about commands? 
>

I just wanted to say "I had to create certain corrections in order to 
fulfill the task"
and "I should have done this earlier".


I hadn't have any problems with translations before changing the meaning of 
{e'i} was proposed.

Hey, may be create another word?


> They certainly are different emotionally, and we are talking about words 
> expressing emotional affect. 
>
> I do many things out of a feeling of obligation that I do not in fact 
> feel constrained/compelled to do. 
>
> More importantly, a command is not really an emotional affect.  Perhaps 
> "feeling in authority" would be an emotional affect that might mark 
> something as a command, but that is probably the ga'i that Robin found 
> unsatisfying (per his original post on the topic).  koga'i would seem to 
> me to mean "do it, because >I< said so". 
>
> Myself, I've always considered that an unmarked ko is a command, which 
> is where ".e'osai ko sarji" originated from - without it, I am 
> commanding the listener to support Lojban, which is an unseemly sort of 
> thing to command.  .e'o and other words can soften a command to 
> something weaker than a command, but unmarked, it is a command for real. 
>
> Wanting to emphasize the command nature, perhaps for 
> immediacy/intensity, I might mark the ko itself with cai (which 
> conveniently, not by design, happens to be similar in sound to "ca" for 
> "now"), but none of the indicators. 
>
> .e'unai and .e'anai are often attitudinals one would attach to a 
> negative command (possibly on the ko, or possibly on the selbri), and 
> marking them with cai, would add emphasis to the negative (and 
> presumably there is a na in the sentence as well). 
>
> If we needed something other than ko to mark a command, it would have to 
> be a discursive, rather than an attitudinal.  Same grammar, but 
> discursives are CVV rather than VV.  But any such marker seems like it 
> would be redundant to me. 
>
> lojbab 
> -- 
> Bob LeChevalier    loj...@lojban.org <javascript:>    www.lojban.org 
> President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


------=_Part_204_3996726.1367490225929
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br>On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 8:32:03 PM UTC+4, lojbab wrote:<blockquot=
e class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: =
1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">.arpis. wrote:
<br>&gt; Are constraint (e'i) and obligation (ei) such different concepts t=
hat we
<br>&gt; want two separate short words for them, especially at the expense =
of
<br>&gt; having a short way to be explicit about commands?
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I just wanted to say "I had to create =
certain corrections in order to fulfill the task"</div><div>and "I should h=
ave done this earlier".</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>I hadn't ha=
ve any problems with translations before changing the meaning of {e'i} was =
proposed.</div><div><br></div><div>Hey, may be create another word?</div><d=
iv><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-le=
ft: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>They certainly are different emotionally, and we are talking about word=
s=20
<br>expressing emotional affect.
<br>
<br>I do many things out of a feeling of obligation that I do not in fact=
=20
<br>feel constrained/compelled to do.
<br>
<br>More importantly, a command is not really an emotional affect. &nbsp;Pe=
rhaps=20
<br>"feeling in authority" would be an emotional affect that might mark=20
<br>something as a command, but that is probably the ga'i that Robin found=
=20
<br>unsatisfying (per his original post on the topic). &nbsp;koga'i would s=
eem to=20
<br>me to mean "do it, because &gt;I&lt; said so".
<br>
<br>Myself, I've always considered that an unmarked ko is a command, which=
=20
<br>is where ".e'osai ko sarji" originated from - without it, I am=20
<br>commanding the listener to support Lojban, which is an unseemly sort of=
=20
<br>thing to command. &nbsp;.e'o and other words can soften a command to=20
<br>something weaker than a command, but unmarked, it is a command for real=
.
<br>
<br>Wanting to emphasize the command nature, perhaps for=20
<br>immediacy/intensity, I might mark the ko itself with cai (which=20
<br>conveniently, not by design, happens to be similar in sound to "ca" for=
=20
<br>"now"), but none of the indicators.
<br>
<br>.e'unai and .e'anai are often attitudinals one would attach to a=20
<br>negative command (possibly on the ko, or possibly on the selbri), and=
=20
<br>marking them with cai, would add emphasis to the negative (and=20
<br>presumably there is a na in the sentence as well).
<br>
<br>If we needed something other than ko to mark a command, it would have t=
o=20
<br>be a discursive, rather than an attitudinal. &nbsp;Same grammar, but=20
<br>discursives are CVV rather than VV. &nbsp;But any such marker seems lik=
e it=20
<br>would be redundant to me.
<br>
<br>lojbab
<br>--=20
<br>Bob LeChevalier &nbsp; &nbsp;<a href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_blank" =
gdf-obfuscated-mailto=3D"RHFEO95oLcIJ">loj...@lojban.org</a> &nbsp; &nbsp;<=
a href=3D"http://www.lojban.org" target=3D"_blank">www.lojban.org</a>
<br>President and Founder, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
<br>
<br></blockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;lojban&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.<br />
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3De=
n">http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
For more options, visit <a href=3D"https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out=
">https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_204_3996726.1367490225929--