Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 16:32:09 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199711102132.QAA15109@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: Rick Nylander Sender: Lojban list From: Rick Nylander Subject: Re: Ironic Use of Attitudinals X-To: Lojban list To: John Cowan Status: O X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1576 X-From-Space-Date: Mon Nov 10 16:32:21 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU >>Since the attitudinals are intended to be expressions of internal states >>rather than statements about those internal states, a fluent speaker >>should not use attitudinals ironically. > >Doesn't follow. Consider ironic use of the English humour-attitudinal 'ha >ha', or perhaps the Yiddish attitudinal 'oy'. Lojbab is referring to _lojban_ attitudinals as being expressions of internal states. >> The fluent speaker will show >>his feelings openly (or express the hiding of feelings perhaps). Ironic >>usages are by implication statements about feelings rather than ex >>pressions >>of them. It takes conscious thought to express an emotion falsely or >>ironically. > >Really just simple acting skills. But the use of an acting skill is, nevertheless, using conscious thought to express false emotions. I interpret the refgram as saying that the listener should accept attitudinals at face value, and that therefore the speaker should use them as such. ("Used sincerely, not ironically.") If someone says {.oiro'o} in conversation, then you should look for blood. Attitudinals constitute the meta-linguistic features that are used in conversation such as smiles. You can call your friend a pig, and if they don't see you smiling, they are likely to be offended - miscommunication has occurred. Attitudinals allow you to inject the smile directly into a text stream, so as to not be dependent upon facial features, emphasis, and changes in pitch. Attitudinals are one of the rather bizarre aspects of lojban that attracted my attention in the first place. Rik.