From lojban+bncCN673cmqFBD6mc3kBBoEYdS5bw@googlegroups.com Fri Sep 17 04:12:59 2010 Received: from mail-yx0-f189.google.com ([209.85.213.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1OwYrZ-0002Hb-Jg; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 04:12:55 -0700 Received: by yxs7 with SMTP id 7sf2167373yxs.16 for ; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 04:12:00 -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:x-vr-score :x-authority-analysis:x-cm-score:message-id:date:from:user-agent :x-accept-language:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=mNbUdDkHW74S9sCwR5fQFCsqfsXaZHcN/FhHjVml6gI=; b=pViICsa3y+Y6EWOhlTACjZZJjnRitbxRKpixpdDU2o+QSVEAo5+jp4SqTcEg+gFO5r IElaf8Z5v9qMK24oRet3rha+a41QH/7jGEMSjBCF3adsf+DSP0QVWYYJXyyXaxRIMK++ 2gBly4tU0wY3+Y9Fei1jdYBNlrn2C3qy/wMps= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-vr-score:x-authority-analysis:x-cm-score :message-id:date:from:user-agent:x-accept-language:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe:content-type; b=T8/YJ/Ro1k/xdzyhygqvX2FFzS82hnkgmUlyUMS7wb8dlEA4B/PAuhOXRBfDTt2+j2 wWPky2yDCsP6HqI4F+g/+tqSV2YtyC/Iv89d+9OXRcEZW+0z7qYUBC63r50leKvKr4gT m1fCK8yQVGh0O8cfrGjy2nlkpLXca3DDh+6h8= Received: by 10.101.151.9 with SMTP id d9mr207560ano.52.1284721914382; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 04:11:54 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.100.86.11 with SMTP id j11ls706996anb.4.p; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 04:11:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.152.40 with SMTP id e40mr3879830ano.52.1284721666280; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 04:07:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.101.152.40 with SMTP id e40mr3870451ano.52.1284721419044; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 04:03:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from eastrmmtao107.cox.net (eastrmmtao107.cox.net [68.230.240.59]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id m14si3387897ybn.4.2010.09.17.04.03.38; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 04:03:38 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 68.230.240.59 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) client-ip=68.230.240.59; Received: from eastrmimpo03.cox.net ([68.1.16.126]) by eastrmmtao107.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.00.01.00 201-2244-105-20090324) with ESMTP id <20100917110339.QTJX21335.eastrmmtao107.cox.net@eastrmimpo03.cox.net> for ; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 07:03:39 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.101] ([70.179.118.163]) by eastrmimpo03.cox.net with bizsmtp id 7n3d1f00B3Xcbvq02n3dko; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 07:03:38 -0400 X-VR-Score: -100.00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=yC2qc2vQlv8sGZde8H6j+ptPXNXumo3F9UlhLmG4EBA= c=1 sm=1 a=d6hN_chgPKUA:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=7ls7RdmwX4RvLZNVULbZcg==:17 a=JMZxGiG0OZewn13Rxg4A:9 a=oqiAtAP8PbebKdgdoWkA:7 a=13kkY60Pfwy8Bm0KBa6VBTyFGLAA:4 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=7ls7RdmwX4RvLZNVULbZcg==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <4C934B04.1090903@lojban.org> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 07:03:32 -0400 From: Robert LeChevalier User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: lojban@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: other-centric UI References: <729457.38076.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <4C8DF3A5.3040702@lojban.org> <364433.94354.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <575987.94184.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <997710.60999.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <997710.60999.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-Original-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 68.230.240.59 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of lojbab@lojban.org) smtp.mail=lojbab@lojban.org 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; format=flowed John E Clifford wrote: > I do wish you would try to justify it, since justification often leads to > clarification of what is being claimed. So far as I can tell, empathetic > emotions (etc.) are not all that common (nor all that rare). They are common > enough that I am surprised that, in the gazillion different ways of doing > expressions, that made their way into CLL, this possibility was missed, The fact that empathic emotional expression was needed, we recognized before CLL. Whether there really is a need to express the direction of the empathy attitudinally wasn't recognized, and I am not that sure it makes sense. Identifying the direction of the empathy seems to me to be a greater degree of self-analysis than we expected for attitudinals/emotional expression. I can imagine that such analysis might happen sometimes. (The example that comes to mind - watching a crowd of kids playing sports, and one of them trips and goes flying. My "Oooh, that's gotta hurt" could be expressed Lojbanically as an attitudinal, and I can imagine if expressing it to a fellow spectator, who by not reacting may not have seen it, I may wish to "point" to the kid who went flying. But I think this would be rare, and in the similar case of two kids whose names I don't know crashing into each other, I'd have to logically AND two descriptions "oooh, that's gotta hurt - the short kid with black hair and the tall kid with the red jersey" - this seems to have gone far beyond expressing empathy.) Since I'm not sure that the expression really empathic, the solution that comes to mind for situations like this is NOT attitudinals or vocatives, but observatives, possibly with attitudinals attached reflecting the speaker's reaction ("cortu .uu" or ".uu cortu" for the above example, and it is trivial to add "fa le tordu ..." on the end to identify the one(s) being "empathized" with). This intuitively seems more "logical" to me, and hence to be preferred for Lojbanic expression. UI isn't generally intended to be an abbreviation for longer Lojban expressions, though we've sometimes analyzed discursives as a shortened form of metalinguistic expression, and I sense that the use of da'oi is closer to a shortened discursive claim than it is to a true expression of empathy. But I would have to see it in context, and THAT is what is missing from the examples cited. If this usage has actually occurred on IRC, as selckiku asserts, then rather than trying to invent examples where it MIGHT beuseful, the better justification would be to quote chunks of IRC conversation where the usage HAS occurred, to see if the situation really seemed like one where empathy expression is taking place. lojbab -- 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.