From lojban-out@lojban.org Tue Jan 02 18:16:59 2007 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 8219 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2007 02:03:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m41.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 3 Jan 2007 02:03:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net) (69.17.117.5) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 Jan 2007 02:03:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 16471 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2007 02:03:06 -0000 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) (envelope-sender ) by mail3.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 3 Jan 2007 02:03:06 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H1vT5-0004So-Bv for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 02 Jan 2007 18:03:04 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H1vSa-00047N-Eu; Tue, 02 Jan 2007 18:02:39 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Tue, 02 Jan 2007 18:01:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H1vRX-000468-Kk for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Tue, 02 Jan 2007 18:01:30 -0800 Received: from bay0-omc1-s32.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.104]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H1vRI-00045Z-OM for lojban-list@lojban.org; Tue, 02 Jan 2007 18:01:24 -0800 Received: from BAY114-W2 ([65.54.169.102]) by bay0-omc1-s32.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2668); Tue, 2 Jan 2007 18:01:06 -0800 X-Originating-Email: [fen141@msn.com] Message-ID: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_98d15e56-e76b-4789-8b54-b8624d12c07c_" Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 02:01:06 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jan 2007 02:01:06.0342 (UTC) FILETIME=[07974C60:01C72EDB] X-Spam-Score: 3.6 X-Spam-Score-Int: 36 X-Spam-Bar: +++ X-archive-position: 13461 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: fen141@msn.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: 3.2 X-Spam-Score-Int: 32 X-Spam-Bar: +++ X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "chain.digitalkingdom.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Does language figure into warfare? Do common ambiguities in English result directly in death, or loss? We have "military time", and various military linguistic traditions "SIR, yes, SIR". The SW hypothesis asks if language influences thought. Does it influence who lives and who dies? [...] Content analysis details: (3.2 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 2.3 FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD Forged hotmail.com 'Received:' header found 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.7 BAYES_20 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 5 to 20% [score: 0.0765] 0.2 DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE RBL: Envelope sender in abuse.rfc-ignorant.org 1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST RBL: Envelope sender in postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org -0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 69.17.117.5 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 X-eGroups-From: Fen Fen From: Fen Fen Reply-To: fen141@msn.com Subject: [lojban] Military language X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=C6YfyhRzx72g2q-wGASo5OIDCa98qN7pd3-LKHi470C6YIvzmg X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 27901 --_98d15e56-e76b-4789-8b54-b8624d12c07c_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Does language figure into warfare? Do common ambiguities in English result = directly in death, or loss? We have "military time", and various military l= inguistic traditions "SIR, yes, SIR". =20 The SW hypothesis asks if language influences thought. Does it influence wh= o lives and who dies? =20 This is both of historic importance and also of coming relevance, especiall= y when combined with transhumanistic technologies. =20 ii ru'e --_98d15e56-e76b-4789-8b54-b8624d12c07c_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Does language figure into warfare? Do common ambiguities in English r= esult directly in death, or loss? We have "military time", and various mili= tary linguistic traditions "SIR, yes, SIR".
 
The SW hypothesis asks if language influences thought. Does it influence wh= o lives and who dies?
 
This is both of historic importance and also of coming relevance, especiall= y when combined with transhumanistic technologies.
 
ii ru'e
--_98d15e56-e76b-4789-8b54-b8624d12c07c_--