From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRDE6LHmBBoEpfip0Q@googlegroups.com Sat Oct 30 12:38:59 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PCHGQ-0000yA-Kw; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:38:59 -0700 Received: by wwb34 with SMTP id 34sf2436595wwb.16 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:38:48 -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-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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=T0etPs65lfsFhvTL9OmkKnErrZHrN1bIKB9QoB6O6o8=; b=0h4XXIDyTOjDT0uQsH0RDqgx+ReK3G8tk4KmZ11NNjgaPIYCNQQLx01dzq4P0QqDdp x0oryUmfPa3AghltxvAdlbDf/M2hcYDnBtXUx9GwTLnEN1dmS41fxwaFc3cSoc65OaHT VUP4yv/8Om6rkY61i3FAr7ra5BihiCfo+HyWs= 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-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:content-transfer-encoding; b=JiMiWHEdQaHB9L7WZ/y3JdN1Y7v3Nqi42sFvyLL9bmaVFMAhAun3r1ciO1rAg3UY+G wPd50VZXv0UE8ak43wYDqPTd7MhmFZhQ+x2r77nyXlqqqXXcHFjaKJA2T9h+PUu+RcRx Y5SaWVkPuXTCLX2TpKL66pAG5515kEBVy0Xtg= Received: by 10.216.237.212 with SMTP id y62mr1983290weq.17.1288467524875; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:38:44 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.3.19 with SMTP id 19ls1437283wbl.3.p; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:38:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.135.12 with SMTP id l12mr661665wbt.12.1288467523706; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:38:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.135.12 with SMTP id l12mr661664wbt.12.1288467523673; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:38:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id h9si1503810wbe.4.2010.10.30.12.38.42; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:38:42 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.182 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.182; Received: by wyb42 with SMTP id 42so4302863wyb.27 for ; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:38:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.151.69 with SMTP id b5mr6280901wbw.168.1288467522101; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:38:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.32.140 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:38:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <241285.20069.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20101027160630.GD43996@alice.local> <2b585d63-1def-4797-8c75-453e66cac098@a37g2000yqi.googlegroups.com> <201010280843.15900.jezuch@interia.pl> <2327e11e-c10a-42d4-9e8f-bc3841fd75d9@j33g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <20101028171348.GB45294@alice.local> <73ebebef-27b3-4093-8a32-1a66115a02c0@e14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> <46808.14053.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <241285.20069.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 16:38:41 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: mi kakne lo bajra From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Llamb=EDas?= To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: jjllambias@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.182 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=jjllambias@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@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 Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 3:16 PM, John E Clifford wro= te: > > To change the > main universe of discourse requires the collaboration of the interlocutor= s, > which must be consciously and overtly given. I don't think I have ever consciously and overtly collaborated in the changing of the universe of discourse in a conversation. If I do it overtly, it must be unconscious, because I don't really know what the rules for doing it are. The only thing I can think of is by omission, i.e. by refraining from saying "there is no such thing as X" every time someone introduces something X new to the conversation. But that omission wouldn't count as overt, and it's hardly conscious, since the normal, unconscious reaction is to accept any new things mentioned as part of the universe of discourse and go on from there. Perhaps in technical or philosophical discussions, when asking the interlocutor to define some specific term they are using. That might count as negotiating the universe of discourse. Or even perhaps in an ordinary conversation when the other person uses a word I'm unfamiliar with. But the reaction then would never be "there are no Xs", the reaction would be "what is an X?". I can't imagine a negotiation to introduce unicorns or cats or computers or teleporters into an ordinary conversation. You just talk about them. > =A0For > example, your second example, second sentence -- which does involve raisi= ng -- How does "la djan cu so'e roi tavla mi lo cevni" involve raising? It does not involve raising by the definition of raising given in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_(linguistics) "In linguistics, raising is a form of argument control in which an argument that belongs semantically to a subordinate clause is realized syntactically as a constituent of a higher clause." There is no subordinate clause in the example for any of the three arguments realized syntactically as constituents of the higher clause to be raised from. So you must have in mind some other definition of "raising". >> Indeed, his remark >> might well be a reminder that the universe of the dialog does not encomp= ass >> unicorns [...] > "the universe of the dialogue" is ambiguous, [...] > (by the way, for me, the expression "universe of discourse" is not > ambiguous). Nor for me. But "the universe of the dialogue" can be, because it suggests "the universe where the dialogue takes place" instead of the universe of discourse. I just don't see how anyone can nonchalantly make a remark that the universe of discourse does not encompass this or that right after someone else has mentioned it. It may make a lot of sense to remark that the world where the dialogue takes place does not encompass it, but remarking that the universe of discourse does not encompass it seems completely unintuitive and counter to all rules of conversation. 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.