From lojban-out@lojban.org Sat Jan 06 08:08:59 2007 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (qmail 94418 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2007 16:02:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166) by m23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Jan 2007 16:02:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net) (69.17.117.7) by mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Jan 2007 16:02:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 1733 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2007 15:59:31 -0000 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) (envelope-sender ) by mail5.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 6 Jan 2007 15:59:31 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H3Dwz-0006Cb-W0 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 07:59:23 -0800 Received: from chain.digitalkingdom.org ([64.81.66.169]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H3DwN-00069S-Hb; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 07:58:50 -0800 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Sat, 06 Jan 2007 07:57:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H3Dv9-000692-6U for lojban-list-real@lojban.org; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 07:57:23 -0800 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.187]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H3Duu-00068q-Gj for lojban-list@lojban.org; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 07:57:22 -0800 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id c31so13759829nfb for ; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 07:57:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.139.17 with SMTP id m17mr2353928bud.1168099026781; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 07:57:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.115.20 with HTTP; Sat, 6 Jan 2007 07:57:06 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <925d17560701060757o1c0b3914w2f28416a2858cb29@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 12:57:06 -0300 In-Reply-To: <3ccac5f10701060328x4dfe521el94e252b88487e24e@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <3ccac5f10701050608x71a6381p89a54e54e2239e65@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560701050934yc0c5158w7d06fb2f916dc9a@mail.gmail.com> <3ccac5f10701051012g4a37b11fnc22ce33e68d30747@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560701051107x61f57454x9dba1da1af8dfa2f@mail.gmail.com> <3ccac5f10701051122x6bd822a1wb5f1f4f04af79912@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560701051203n32513783neab6a15a5b5856df@mail.gmail.com> <3ccac5f10701051216h13364c34ue4b10daf63bfb52d@mail.gmail.com> <925d17560701051227k6ea1881erbecc9fd3890df70b@mail.gmail.com> <3ccac5f10701060328x4dfe521el94e252b88487e24e@mail.gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.5 X-Spam-Score-Int: -24 X-Spam-Bar: -- X-archive-position: 13519 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-list: lojban-list X-Spam-Score: -2.5 X-Spam-Score-Int: -24 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: On 1/6/07, Cyril Slobin wrote: > > I have spent a sleepless night thinking about the subject, and I have > some new enlightenment now. Let us put "promise" aside, consider > "request". [...] Content analysis details: (-2.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list To: lojban@yahoogroups.com X-Originating-IP: 69.17.117.7 X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:0:0:0 X-eGroups-From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?=" From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?=" Reply-To: jjllambias@gmail.com Subject: [lojban] Re: Duty, promice etc... X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790; y=jMf-MgrN98ml455FRCgVVsmsfTHyW2ltB-bNgnzaXNI3S7mo9A X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out X-Yahoo-Message-Num: 27958 On 1/6/07, Cyril Slobin wrote: > > I have spent a sleepless night thinking about the subject, and I have > some new enlightenment now. Let us put "promise" aside, consider > "request". Yes, all of these words describing performative utterances would seem to behave similarly. "Command" would be another one. > Imagine the following scenario: I, Cyril, send to you, > Jorge, a letter with request to explain your ideas about {nupre}. So you would write: (1) e'o ko ciksi lo sidbo be zo nupre bei do} A third party would describe that as: (2) la kir cu cpedu fi la xorxes fe lo nu ciksi lo sidbo be zo nupre bei xy I would say that utterance (1) is a request, but utterance (2) is not a request. Similarly: (3) nu'e do'u mi ba ciksi (4) ko'a nupre lo nu ko'a ba ciksi I would say utterance (3) is a promise, but utterance (4) is not a promise. > But > you do not receive my letter - it was disappeared into the Great Black > Hole in the Middle of the Internet. But you, being not aware about my > request, by your own initiative, write a message explaining your ideas > about {nupre}. Do you comply with my request? The answer "no" is at > least defensible. To comply with request, you must not only do the > action requested, but also do it because of request. Right. > Similarly, to > fulfil the promise is not just do the promised thing, but do it > because of promise. I agree. So {zukte lo se nupre} is not ideal for "keep a promise", because of what you say. The problem is with {zukte}, "Keep" a promise involves something more than doing whatever was promised. We probably need some lujvo. Neither {nupre} nor {cpedu} sem to have a corresponding gismu for the carrying out of the promise/request, but interesingly {minde} does have {tinbe}. So what we need is to fill the gaps in: minde:tinbe cpedu:????? nupre:????? Perhaps {cpemansa} and {nupmansa}? Then {midmansa}={tinbe}. > So my current solution is: > > le nu do mu'igi nupre gi zukte vau ko'a cu se bebna > > But at this point I remember about the price of infinite precision... > So for practical needs I just say {tu'a lo se nupre be do cu bebna}. Or {lo nu do nupmansa cu se bebna} mu'o mi'e xorxes To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to lojban-list-request@lojban.org with the subject unsubscribe, or go to http://www.lojban.org/lsg2/, or if you're really stuck, send mail to secretary@lojban.org for help.