From ragnarok@pobox.com Sun Jun 10 19:13:15 2001
Return-Path: <raganok@intrex.net>
X-Sender: raganok@intrex.net
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_1_3); 11 Jun 2001 02:13:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 68837 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2001 02:13:14 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 11 Jun 2001 02:13:14 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO intrex.net) (209.42.192.246) by mta2 with SMTP; 11 Jun 2001 02:13:14 -0000
Received: from Craig [209.42.200.34] by intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id A93D472A0076; Sun, 10 Jun 2001 22:13:17 -0400
Reply-To: <ragnarok@pobox.com>
To: <lojban@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [lojban] An approach to attitudinals
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 22:13:12 -0400
Message-ID: <LPBBLNNHBOGBGAINBIEFGEMKCBAA.raganok@intrex.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.4.33.0106102126590.5214-100000@reva.sixgirls.org>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-eGroups-From: "Craig" <raganok@intrex.net>
From: "Craig" <ragnarok@pobox.com>
X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 7783

> xu do pu klama ti
> Did you come here?

> do pu klama ti xu
> Did you come *here*? (as opposed to there)

> I guess an issue remains: Have I asserted that you came somewhere at all,
> or not?

 I know whether I came, why should you need to assert it?
The English doesn't assert eaither way. Using that as a model isn't bias,
it's pragmatism. The English doesn't assert not because that's not how
English works, but because you don't have to tell me what I did unless I
have amnesia.

                             --la kreig.daniyl

     'segu temci fa le bavli gi mi'o ba renvi lo purci
     .i ga la fonxa cu janbe gi du mi'
                     -la djimis.BYFet

pgp public key ID:  0x5C3A1E74