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 m0rEaEg-00007nC; 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 5317; Sat, 03 Dec 94 22:22:41 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 5312; Sat, 3 Dec 1994 22:22:41 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3278; Sat, 3 Dec 1994 21:19:25 +0100 Date: Sat, 3 Dec 1994 13:16:51 -0700 Reply-To: Chris Bogart Sender: Lojban list From: Chris Bogart Subject: Re: modals (was: cmavo hit-list) To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 2494 Lines: 56 Mark Biggar says: >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: > >ja'o I conclude (deductive? or does this also include inductive?) >su'a I generlize "ja'o" is deductive, "su'a" is inductive, and "su'anai" is abductive. >pe'i I opine (suppose?) "da'i" might be closer to "suppose". It's not strictly an evidential but pe'i it could be used the same way. >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. I would be inclined to use ka'u; science is no less cultural than religion. The things I "know" about science that I haven't tested myself, aren't really from a particular authority or trusted source; I "know" electricity is made of electrons because lots of books say so and everyone believes it. I have no particular reason to trust Milliken (is he the guy that did the relevant experiment?), and I couldn't even name any of the people who have duplicated his experiment, much less think of them as "trusted sources". In other words, I would argue that science is a cultural pursuit, in that the whole culture participates in it to some extent and there are no infallible trusted authorities. I would also use "ka'u" for well-known religious "facts" that I accepted as true, "ti'e" for religious things I was more doubtful of, and "se'o" or "za'a" for religious things revealed to me personally. Just my relfepni; this may reflect more my attitude towards science and religion than any useful semantic advice about the evidentials. >In addition how do you attribute a supposed modal to someone other then >yourself? Good question. Is there a way to work "za'a" into: Newton observed that the apple fell How about: la NUtyn. zo'u za'a se'inai le plise cu farlu I don't know if that's right; it's kind of forced anyway. I'd just say: la NUtyn. zgana lemu'e le plise cu farlu Ka'u the evidentials are intended to create a certain style of speech, that gives a greater clue into one's thinking process, but za'a it's generally possible to make the same statements more explicitly with gismu. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Chris Bogart cbogart@quetzal.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~