Message-Id: <199308050133.AA09090@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
Date:         Thu, 5 Aug 1993 11:30:47 +1000
Reply-To: Nick Nicholas <nsn@MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: Nick Nicholas <nsn@MULLIAN.EE.MU.OZ.AU>
Subject:      Re: Cowan on deixis
To: Erik Rauch <erikr@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
In-Reply-To:  <no.id> from "John Cowan" at Aug 3, 93 02:06:59 pm
Status: O

The Seraphim surely rejoiced when John Cowan spoke thus:

#Personal deixis:  Absolute.
#        ko'a cusku le se du'u mi klama le zarci
#means that she said I went to the store, as in English.  (I heard a claim
#once that Esperanto has relative deixis in this situation: that "John said
#that I went to the store", literally translated, comes out meaning that
#John said John went to the store.  I couldn't get this confirmed:  is it
#really true?)

News to me. No, Esperanto does nothing of the sort, though Hopi sort-of does.

#Epistemic deixis:  Relative, in my opinion.
#I think the fact that "kau" belongs to UI is irrelevant.  While it is
#true that the attitudinal members of UI are absolute, that does not apply
#to all members.

What is the status with evidentials? When, at the time {kau} was first
proposed, I suggested that evidentials be relative, I recall being shot down.
But a relativised evidential does make more sense to me than an absolute
one.

*******************************************************************************
 A freshman once observed to me:         Nick Nicholas am I, of Melbourne, Oz.
 On the edge of the Rubicon,             nsn@munagin.ee.mu.oz.au (IRC: nicxjo)
 men don't go fishing.                   CogSci and CompSci & wannabe Linguist.
   - Alice Goodman, _Nixon In China_     Mail me! Mail me! Mail me! Or don't!!