Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #1) id m0rEaEf-00007mC; Mon, 5 Dec 94 12:01 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5110; Sat, 03 Dec 94 22:12:51 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 5108; Sat, 3 Dec 1994 22:12:50 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2516; Sat, 3 Dec 1994 21:09:05 +0100 Date: Sat, 3 Dec 1994 14:58:26 EST Reply-To: jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU Sender: Lojban list From: Jorge Llambias Subject: Re: modals (was: cmavo hit-list) X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1809 Lines: 54 la'o gy Mark Biggar gy cusku di'e > Speaking of the modals that express how you know something, I got some > questions. I noticed that besides Se'o (by inner experience) that there also: > > ba'a I anticipate (does this include guess?) I'd say yes, but you can make it more specific adding ju'o, ju'ocu'i, etc. {ba'aju'o} would be "I expect with certainty", {ba'aju'ocu'i} more like "I guess". A bit wordy, though. > ca'e I define > ja'o I conclude (deductive? or does this also include inductive?) Probably does. I don't think these are up to such fine distinctions. > ju'a I state > ka'u I know culturally > pe'i I opine (suppose?) da'i is "supposing". > ru'a I postulate (includes theorize?) What's "theorize"? Is it something like "Let's assume..."? > su'a I generlize > ti'e I hear > za'a I obsreve > > In the course of trying to translate some passages of a grade-school level > science book (in an attempt to get my science-mad 5th-grade nephew > interested in Lojban) I ran into the need for at least one more model > of this type, one that says "I know on authority" or "from a trusted source". > In some cases ka'u will work (like when talking about religion) and ti'e > is much too weak. When talking about things that are known from expermintal > evidence, you can't really use za'a unless you personally did the experiment, > or if a logical proof exists, you really can't use ja'o unless you yourself have > done or verified the proof. > > In addition how do you attribute a supposed modal to someone other then > yourself? dai is the empathy marker, which I think could be extended to this how you know something. za'adai would work for "I observe empathically", ie through someone else's observations really. The same for ja'odai. Or is this too nonsensical? Jorge