From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRDd2KLfBBoEoXb2KQ@googlegroups.com Mon May 10 18:01:37 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f168.google.com ([209.85.210.168]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OBdqm-0000SW-7N; Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:36 -0700 Received: by yxe40 with SMTP id 40sf3093195yxe.28 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:26 -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:mime-version:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-authentication-results:x-original-sender:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=NXsEuTdziv5k41CsJ8oi1GhlGqdQWnHHhvfsrD1JPo8=; b=qxvaphGB3YCSnFvLqV4P+mFACEy0PNmjNkw5jPalvYdt4s48wRrWq8bwF3ZsLrTE8n MTDx04IN3iqp0oUztP9Fky29siT9Wx9caDyY3RmAvjgtfc0oE0ox+d3wSfngSVv5bSca J3WXHPzYIqR7N7VgS37r8TFWom6m1HVNdfRCs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-authentication-results :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=YrufCiL3tlqtwjOxISWBx1SU0f4HrEYP+FwxVJJSkqKXR+MTCGLGXAmmPGEvlr4MWD Kd3/dEKHTQVBfrzQBlBbA9cgU6S1b3GgiGVm5pAuCE/3V/U5k2b/ODPpr2XuJNLpXpzK n4iXv48IOKi5Lw5SY24cA564QRhbSR7Mj23NA= Received: by 10.100.234.38 with SMTP id g38mr63216anh.59.1273539677813; Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:17 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.101.139.8 with SMTP id r8ls1131916ann.7.p; Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.106.24 with SMTP id i24mr329207anm.38.1273539676945; Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.106.24 with SMTP id i24mr329206anm.38.1273539676910; Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qy0-f192.google.com (mail-qy0-f192.google.com [209.85.221.192]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 18si573785gxk.3.2010.05.10.18.01.15; Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:15 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.192 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.221.192; Received: by qyk30 with SMTP id 30so7684902qyk.16 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.217.208 with SMTP id hn16mr3972226qcb.87.1273539675691; Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.82.11 with HTTP; Mon, 10 May 2010 18:01:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 22:01:15 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Attitudinal scales and the meaning of {cu'i} From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.221.192 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@gmail.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@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: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Daniel Brockman wrote= : > > You're right. =A0It doesn't work for {ba'a cu'i}. =A0I hadn't thought of = that. =A0That > one really does have a very non-compositional meaning. =A0We would have > to abandon it or make it a special case (ugh). ba'acu'i is weird. It makes it difficult to say you don't expect something, or that you forgot something. Although I suppose "ba'anai cu'i" is still available for not remembering. I suppose "ba'aru'ecai" is as close as you can get to not expecting. > 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}? We can. CAIs can be piled on indefinitely. > Why not {o'a cu'i sai} for "strong modesty"? That's how I would understand it. Although it doesn't seem very modest to express modesty so strongly. Let's say "u'o cu'i sai" for extreme shyness instead. > Also: if {cu'i} doesn't do it, how do we indicate absence of an emotion? I would have said "be'u", but apparently someone feels very strongly that "be'u" cannot apply to other attitudinals. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 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@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.