Message-Id: <199309140430.AA01262@eli.CS.YALE.EDU>
Date:         Tue, 14 Sep 1993 00:27:59 -0400
Reply-To: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU>
From: Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      old response to And - Lojban and humor
To: Erik Rauch <rauch>
Status: RO

And:
You wrote regarding a Lojban "joke" that you made last month:
>[I wavered, trying to decide whether to use "zoho" instead of
>"..." but felt that "zoho" was a bit too grossly obvious. Part
>of the point of much humour is that it is not flagged too
>explicitly - one uses more subtle means, such as slightly
>exaggerated intonation, or an extra two full stops.]

Ah, but exaggerated intonation or extended stops IS a form of marking,
and its equivalent in Lojban MUST be some cmavo or compound.  Humor is
probably ALWAYS marked in some way, or it could not be recognized
(unless the humor relies on 'in-knowledge' of the listener that may for
example betray exaggeration or outright falsehood.

Now it may be that we want more refinement of types of humor expression
besides the simple "zo'o".  And we in fact do:  .ianai is often an
expression of irony, there is an attoitudinal for exaggeration and for
understatement, etc.  What probably needs to be done (if Cowan didn't do
so in the attitudinal paper) is come up with a range of humor techniques
in natlangs and show how these are expressed in Lojban using various
attitudinals.

lojbab