From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRCpn6XfBBoEAggCVw@googlegroups.com Tue May 11 05:38:25 2010 Received: from mail-pz0-f165.google.com ([209.85.222.165]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1OBoj2-0006El-DL; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:38:21 -0700 Received: by pzk37 with SMTP id 37sf1361445pzk.25 for ; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:38:10 -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; bh=z8iwizhPNjY1GXyj0cP5RJ0A35H5VDo8c94cMrrFDn4=; b=l5tsMU4an2QCgyUrkgz5m23MDM36RGqRyQY8tZdb8XrnvPem/s21kEdLBAZeKe3mrf yWwYNNIHu3VuuinqqS/8auAWVrRMo2FGB08t7VKoIeIJ3WyH+rpXjVCNKwM1gbreGiAk 0Yqyk0iqkl+yf4326TJvArV4ux9+EyJFPgqLo= 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; b=yNCCTGUvDYUJiIM+3dQ+M+sdnj+ayQhSev+Y2TsjLqaRig3TvGudG227SViOIwxXTo 5c7K0yjZl7MU2Er+fO5LnqQEQTVAxxcEJSa/Ta3B+QSCNKSkZTktENUz6gRCbNCPX4VC oOK8+QUYw4aDeGuuupH2OCVxOi7MkESzWbqfQ= Received: by 10.142.66.26 with SMTP id o26mr271467wfa.34.1273581481890; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:38:01 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.142.2.23 with SMTP id 23ls15985851wfb.3.p; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.20.10 with SMTP id x10mr1031389wfi.14.1273581480157; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.20.10 with SMTP id x10mr1031388wfi.14.1273581480113; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vw0-f47.google.com (mail-vw0-f47.google.com [209.85.212.47]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id u10si5997365wak.2.2010.05.11.05.37.58; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:37:59 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.47 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.47; Received: by vws1 with SMTP id 1so1201320vws.6 for ; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:37:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.235.202 with SMTP id kh10mr4461728qcb.78.1273581477332; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:37:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.82.11 with HTTP; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:37:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 09:37:57 -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 209.85.212.47 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 On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:35 AM, Daniel Brockman wrote: > 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 would agree with that. > 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 What about "nutli" instead of "na"? Or maybe na/na'e/nutli are all more or less equivalent in this context. > 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 Shouldn't that be "sei mutce lo ka milxe lo ka broda"? > I have never used {be'u} nor seen it used, so I have no intuitions > about what it might mean. I think it's "sei to'e dukse". mu'o mi'e xorxes -- 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.