From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Tue Jun 12 16:44:38 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 12 Jun 2001 23:44:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 83002 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2001 23:29:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 12 Jun 2001 23:29:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO chain.digitalkingdom.org) (64.169.75.101) by mta2 with SMTP; 12 Jun 2001 23:29:16 -0000 Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 159xax-0004d3-00 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2001 16:29:11 -0700 Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 16:29:11 -0700 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] An approach to attitudinals Message-ID: <20010612162911.S14438@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com References: <3B23FDD3.61B07A25@flash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3B23FDD3.61B07A25@flash.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i From: Robin Lee Powell X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 7874 On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 06:08:03PM -0500, Richard Todd wrote: > Jorge Llambias wrote: > > >With a suffix, there's still context involved, but at least you know up > > >front whether the speaker is asserting a true statement. This could go > > >a long way towards clarity. > > > > Yes, but suffixes are expensive in terms of usability. I don't want > > to have to use an affix every time I use an attitudinal, it takes > > away the best thing that attitudinals have going for them: their > > very compact form for the great amount of meaning that they add. > > I'd exchange an extra syllable for clarity any day. Anywhere else in the language, I'd agree. But not here. If you want total clarity, use the gismu equivalents of the attitudinals. -Robin -- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest. le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno je xlali -- RLP http://www.lojban.org/