From gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch Mon Feb 04 10:27:54 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: gordon.dyke@bluewin.ch X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 4 Feb 2002 18:27:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 35043 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2002 18:27:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m12.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 4 Feb 2002 18:27:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mta11n.bluewin.ch) (195.186.1.211) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 4 Feb 2002 18:27:51 -0000 Received: from oemcomputer (213.3.33.29) by mta11n.bluewin.ch (Bluewin AG 6.0.039) id 3C5DA0DC00041F57 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 19:27:44 +0100 Message-ID: <013901c1ada9$35b028a0$a02103d5@oemcomputer> To: "jboste" Subject: Re: Truth Value of UI (was: Re: UI for 'possible' (was: Re: [lojban] Bibletranslation style question) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 19:23:59 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 From: "G. Dyke" X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=81437350 X-Yahoo-Profile: gregvdyke X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 13191 ----- Original Message ----- From: "G. Dyke" To: "Invent Yourself" Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 9:19 PM Subject: Re: Truth Value of UI (was: Re: UI for 'possible' (was: Re: [lojban] Bibletranslation style question) > But there is a fundamental > > difference between "ui" and "mi gleki". With "ui" there is, normally, > > a causal connection between being happy and saying "ui", and this > > is not the case with "mi gleki". > > > > Well, only a liar (or actor, etc) would say "mi gleki" if they weren't > actually le gleki. > Maybe this has something to do with someone saying {mi gleki} being a {lo gleki} while someone who says {ui} is only a {le gleki} ? :-D Let me see if I can agree with one of you, and then maybe you'll tell me who that is... if I say {mi gleki}then this is true jo I am a {lo gleki} if I say {ui} there is no way of knowing whether this is true or false (In the same way that a forced smile is still a smile), but I could still be saying ui in good or bad faith. if I say {ui mi gleki} this means "I am happy, I'm happy about being happy" (the ui giving us the 2nd part of the sentence). whether the ui is "forced" or not, {mi gleki} still stands. if I say {mi no'u la lojbab cu gleki}, {no'u la lojbab} does have a truth value (IE is not a UI) and because it is false, we can only say that the whole proposition is false. I think I'm with And, but I'm not sure... mu'omi'e greg (I'm getting sick of sending messages to the sender only... can I do something to outlook to sort this out??)