From lojban+bncCICntNPQBRDh8rrkBBoEE9M4EA@googlegroups.com Mon Sep 13 16:53:35 2010 Received: from mail-gw0-f61.google.com ([74.125.83.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OvIpq-00077f-St; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:53:35 -0700 Received: by gwb11 with SMTP id 11sf4215852gwb.16 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:53:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:x-beenthere:received:mime-version :received:received:date:in-reply-to:x-ip:references:user-agent :x-http-useragent:message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=yVghDl1STsP7+JvycsYKLcs5EW+aup/uf/x1duUJFNA=; b=whMJHYQrYs3bPQVo90k5Ju3wPMN5oOT+zTQu8lrcuGVIdUqz8KGvATsDe1MQ4wS13y tVKKJM3pfQExcPMz2JMUcKm5UrzyaYtvTyGT+1lzUXJS+UkKfaqcsTxx7rSQCh3/JOds ihQd6fZzVyI2xGP/tpve1naUEkwShRSPLOi2E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:mime-version:date:in-reply-to:x-ip:references :user-agent:x-http-useragent:message-id:subject:from:to :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=0C5shmWRUPF/mYh4UbKnDHLeJqUYRL2YssxQeUMF0/rnsIJ6Rv+lZG9OdSXdtgbJaz be8YS6exMZ48sMTuOIXVlRMgGIM8dZcb5868C9onS9v3vkGjemiI9idgFEtge/iX913i xlBKgWZNgrX+opJpexTcvo+hdKlvoTqSJr/Iw= Received: by 10.90.56.16 with SMTP id e16mr494466aga.27.1284421985167; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:53:05 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.91.215.10 with SMTP id s10ls811185agq.5.p; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:53:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.91.220.5 with SMTP id x5mr493484agq.21.1284421984524; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:53:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by f20g2000pro.googlegroups.com with HTTP; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:53:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 16:53:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-IP: 32.172.149.144 References: <729457.38076.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C8DF3A5.3040702@lojban.org> User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100825 Ubuntu/10.04 (lucid) Firefox/3.6.9,gzip(gfe) Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Re: other-centric UI From: Lindar To: lojban X-Original-Sender: lindarthebard@yahoo.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 For the sake of contiguity, I think that my proposed meanings should occupy the UI1 space. The reason for this is that the evidential meanings should go in UI2 with the evidentials, and the non-irrealis UI should go in with the other non-irrealis UI in UI1. However, if you want to create a discontinuity in the grammar just for conservatism for its own sake, and people agree with this point, then I will take the experimental space and start using it. However, that is, in my opinion, breaking the stylistic contiguity and regularity in the language. Every UI1 should be an expression of emotion, every UI2 should be an expression of evidence. Now you're saying that you want the entire A E and half of I series to act like evidentials and then the other half to act like what they really are? It seems like you're creating a giant exception to the rule, which is, in my opinion, extremely unlojbanic. I'm not trying to push -your- definitions to the experimental space because I'm trying to treat you as less than I or as a second-class citizen. It has nothing to do with you or your proponents personally; I'm not trying to attack you as you seem to think. I want to move the evidential definitions to new words and place them in UI2 because they *act like evidentials*, so they should be put with the evidentials. The pure emotion definitions I want should be the original A-I for the sake of CONSISTENCY, because that's what the language is supposed to be about. It should have consistent rules and patterns which make things easy to remember and consistent within itself. So put yourself in the shoes of a newbie. Now they have to remember that half of UI2 actually functions like UI1 and half of UI1 actually acts like UI2, but which ones and why? Why not make it consistent and regular like the language should be? I'd like to hear more about this from the people on the mailing list, but in the mean time, I am going to write up a formal proposal and petition the BPFK. By the way, I like da'oi a lot. So it's {.uuda'oi .selkik.} for if I feel pity toward selkik? I'm using that! -- 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.