From lojban+bncCMvjp-TQBRD5pqLfBBoEiiqLXA@googlegroups.com Mon May 10 16:15:25 2010 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OBcC0-0001xC-Nr; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:15:25 -0700 Received: by wyb36 with SMTP id 36sf1953675wyb.16 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:15:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:received:received :received:received-spf:received:received:mime-version:sender :received:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=XLWpkYhIxArhOcuQ5HYxPRp/JCtJ+j3OXDbc+5xL80Y=; b=eFWayxfRrZCJ2alPk41mukW+H5nTmYEM/yyxR2FuLJk1nrqKd6T2z2daphdIpCfnIF vEXwnSVdC3y62t4lkXcr9dACU+F0W3qgtK/bpD63ofs98CoEii1i6Ad06/FkbliH3UKN A23O5iaxmW8mrGSwag2rmJ2/c2vqp9IdElRH0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; b=Lkzh4JXFbfVooU3/qQCRqB5LSpFU2L050XzE9vsZrVOklNwEjLgqRshjv6JfBmYMqL m9n+RPLLCz2Z7bTeMd51Tu9TQLuQxPLGO6Q7l5P7laFp2y9cr1nsVxSx6pDNcFfF8w1O xUlo09sMHdlDLclkYHeyxHpBRRrioW31vUzFs= Received: by 10.223.5.69 with SMTP id 5mr531215fau.37.1273533306003; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:15:06 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.223.66.18 with SMTP id l18ls20041522fai.1.p; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:15:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.62.80 with SMTP id w16mr235987fah.22.1273533304391; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:15:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.62.80 with SMTP id w16mr235986fah.22.1273533304368; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:15:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-fx0-f41.google.com (mail-fx0-f41.google.com [209.85.161.41]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id x13si3534699fah.7.2010.05.10.16.15.03; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:15:03 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of dbrockman@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.41 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.161.41; Received: by fxm9 with SMTP id 9so1306358fxm.14 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:15:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.33.215 with SMTP id i23mr2376711bkd.86.1273533303080; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:15:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.26.216 with HTTP; Mon, 10 May 2010 16:14:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Daniel Brockman Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 01:14:43 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Attitudinal scales and the meaning of {cu'i} To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of dbrockman@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.41 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=dbrockman@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: dbrockman@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > It makes sense, and I think that's how it works for the most part. > Where we may disagree is in that I think the cu'i point in many cases > (not always) is qualitatively different from just being the zero point > on a scale. An extreme example might be "ba'a cu'i", which I don't > know how you could fit as the zero point of the "ba'a" scale, You're right. It doesn't work for {ba'a cu'i}. I hadn't thought of that. That one really does have a very non-compositional meaning. We would have to abandon it or make it a special case (ugh). So I guess that's that. > but even > without going to such extreme cases, something like "modesty" is not > quite the same as mere absence of pride, it's more like an extreme > minimization or tempering, toning down, mitigating of pride (much more > than "ru'e"). Or somehing like that. Then I don't want {o'a cu'i} to mean "modesty", because I want it to mean "absence of pride", which is close enough to "modesty" for me. (But maybe you've changed my mind, now, with {ba'a cu'i}.) But then so if {o'a cu'i} is a distinct attitude of its own, why can't we modify it with {sai} and {ru'e}? Why not {o'a cu'i sai} for "strong modesty"? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.