Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of betsemes@gmail.com designates 209.85.217.181 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.181;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALm==BUm693hFg+hstkOmEDM16x_w=z56oJ8oJgp-06Bf1DCtQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20130504201243.GE20411@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
	<51856E57.2010808@gmx.de>
	<20130504202515.GG20411@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
	<CAHxnAm+NUxq=seQpKCgLT9Wmoouj4ypJMZeXBxNFDz3m3s8v_Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<55921D19-DB32-4D41-B6E9-1552B5BC9AB3@yahoo.com>
	<CAHxnAmKZTxe4Ps0H0WhVyY2k3WoiFi3=3zXsgRoW3EAg3jpJEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A8DBDCA-994A-4A20-9BAD-A3A4F3561B49@yahoo.com>
	<CAHxnAmLZ0WLPyTWqfLj=dsh+kBDcWdkh+qmrVnEJNs9mteoCZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<5F42DC95-D2C4-4B0D-B018-A4BC82AAFB06@yahoo.com>
	<CAHiXx=MzU2uukh7VfJsfOREStCkY3pBrDVKzCFghmRLumZA3Xg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxnAmK7VEvD+7n1YB1hd4S0EqK0GBTOWRdG6fppAvfoPsFP4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALm==BUm693hFg+hstkOmEDM16x_w=z56oJ8oJgp-06Bf1DCtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 10:03:31 -0400
Message-ID: <CAHxnAmJB3khUmrn5C6G+VN5TuVFu-H2oF-DkYBeGmMTsegOOMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [lojban] Robin retry: commands.
From: Betsemes <betsemes@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Precedence: list
Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com
Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
X-Spam_bar: /

On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 9:47 AM, .arpis. <rpglover64+jbobau@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, but the discussion is about whether to redefine (or at least to use
> dialectically) {e'i} to be more in line with {e'o}, {e'u}, and {e'a}.

Thanks. That makes much better sense since all three seems to be more
intensions than anything else.

> "negative request" seems to have been interpreted as "please don't" in the
> few uses I read of the few uses I found (here:
> http://www.lojban.org/corpus/)
> The BPFK proposed revision is to make {e'o nai} an offer.
> The problem with your logic for making {e'o nai} a command is that an
> analogous argument can be made for {e'u nai}.

Hmmm, actually, making {e'unai} mean "command" makes much better sense
to me than "warning":
attitudinal: suggestion - abandon suggest - command.

mu'o mi'e betsemes

-- 
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.