Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 12:51:07 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199712161751.MAA16810@locke.ccil.org> Reply-To: And Rosta Sender: Lojban list From: And Rosta Organization: University of Central Lancashire Subject: Re: la'e X-To: LOJBAN@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: John Cowan X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 759 X-From-Space-Date: Tue Dec 16 12:51:08 1997 X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU John: > la lojbab. cusku di'e > > > Or are you saying that xukau is like zo'e and cannot be quantified, but > > rather must be reanalyzed at each sumti position at which it occurs > > independently? So far we have only a couple such words possible as sumti > > and they are called out as such in their definitions. > > As you yourself have said, "kau" is an attitudinal, and sentences > with attitudinals in them don't necessarily allow of logical > analysis. I hasten to add, though, that kau (or Q-kau) very much affects truth-conditional meaning. So to clarify your point, sentences with attitudinals in them don't necessarily have a straightforwardly compositional semantics that can be applied mechanically without regard to lexical semantics. --And