From lojban+bncCMvjp-TQBRDV9aPfBBoER125rg@googlegroups.com Mon May 10 23:36:25 2010 Received: from mail-wy0-f189.google.com ([74.125.82.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OBj4m-0008EL-U0; Mon, 10 May 2010 23:36:25 -0700 Received: by wyb36 with SMTP id 36sf2052630wyb.16 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 23:36:13 -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=e/qZBAkZ+qlhQ2yO7xTO6RG5ikvtAG9GN0WIWxn1MbQ=; b=cf2BvHlsrMAcMUwDVVgM5kwpq+JVyzknquD+KfwA/25HwXdUQdsWNtMmGJnjxrJo+C Fw7jW1hiU0AJ/Nv4TTUkx9CDkObwbhcHTBlLSzZAATVslCPYT5YYBhbQvP6rSyP00XOp WQ5+OPrhMJg8Rdxif7GnRsEtDmh5cS+zctPzY= 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=6JiyZ9rUN1jlr8doTjhahOizzG91uc5ybx2oRXLBD7ZFuhLqdQKzm0pPOtnN6MTIC0 CjRyGaxbuPfdyQI83GffRpupBvotCeDe+DQChLYWL+snFwLU28iIbhd3M4uCXjUCoFRw KF+j4+aD6wuj8kA9cIXGWhqk4unI8UM9cLpoA= Received: by 10.223.132.205 with SMTP id c13mr566442fat.28.1273559765800; Mon, 10 May 2010 23:36:05 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.87.8.39 with SMTP id l39ls5245000fgi.2.p; Mon, 10 May 2010 23:36:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.87.1.9 with SMTP id d9mr329739fgi.23.1273559764259; Mon, 10 May 2010 23:36:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.87.1.9 with SMTP id d9mr329738fgi.23.1273559764239; Mon, 10 May 2010 23:36:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.157]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id 22si3762194fas.0.2010.05.10.23.36.03; Mon, 10 May 2010 23:36:03 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of dbrockman@gmail.com designates 72.14.220.157 as permitted sender) client-ip=72.14.220.157; Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id e12so790839fga.9 for ; Mon, 10 May 2010 23:36:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.33.215 with SMTP id i23mr2440109bkd.86.1273559763090; Mon, 10 May 2010 23:36:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.204.26.216 with HTTP; Mon, 10 May 2010 23:35:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Daniel Brockman Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 08:35:43 +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 72.14.220.157 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 Having slept on this, I think I'm back to my original position, and I now think that {ba'a cu'i} should mean "non-expectation". But at least now I know that it's not fully backwards-compatible. I might prefer {cu'i} as a contradictory negator for attitudinals, by the way, rather than a "zeroer". That gives UI = sei broda UI ru'e = sei milxe lo ka broda UI sai = sei mutce lo ka broda UI cu'i = sei na broda UI nai = sei to'e broda UI sai cu'i = sei na mutce lo ka broda UI ru'e sai = sei milxe lo ka mutce broda I think this is my current preferred scheme. Some random examples: o'a = sei jgira o'a cu'i = sei na jgira ba'a = sei kanpe ba'a cu'i = sei na kanpe ba'a nai = sei morji ba'a nai cu'i = sei na morji ba'a sai cu'i = se ina mutce lo ka kanpe > I suppose "ba'aru'ecai" is as close as you can get to not expecting. Ugh... >> 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. Good point. :-) >> 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. I have never used {be'u} nor seen it used, so I have no intuitions about what it might mean. -- 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.