From lojban+bncCOjSjrXVGBCS7cnnBBoEXuvznA@googlegroups.com Sun Nov 28 07:35:08 2010 Received: from mail-gw0-f61.google.com ([74.125.83.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PMjHF-0003lZ-1j; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:35:05 -0800 Received: by gwj17 with SMTP id 17sf211460gwj.16 for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:34:51 -0800 (PST) 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 :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; bh=QXBtx6zS2Sik3SaJPFLp0+lURy0FuIgfIHpsppXjunQ=; b=yxhEN3vQ1OYhp9rMwq+Ekk2l3pfsoTU/HKL0CQVFFvrSSuiU57WKrzDQcfJf32VBev Cy/VUlV5rpYOUJg3p5vgOrBEdSw3QZ5M/L7HxyjkBhlPfWK2DcHqEjsXVW1sNy9HbnKZ rlfRkKhzKvG23QZDxQBTmVlKz7ecTomu6qJZc= 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; b=uhqLXB9ptY+/WSEUfDwnnZRMS2DnmPWWvLmo3/LAWtvFTriKYxfJWPs4S2QuR2726A L38l0Qg8sEPk938oD9EoOnGcjfLZJvxAIY5t7qPsZQQmaeeLPH9iPk7h6zFLpdFs+KO7 JeXApnmkFviTes3HQRKCJwZiow+0G4pS3pWkc= Received: by 10.91.50.29 with SMTP id c29mr362333agk.13.1290958482408; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:34:42 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.141.220 with SMTP id n28ls1368355ibu.0.p; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:34:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.37.201 with SMTP id y9mr208728ibd.8.1290958480633; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:34:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.37.201 with SMTP id y9mr208727ibd.8.1290958480587; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:34:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-iw0-f173.google.com (mail-iw0-f173.google.com [209.85.214.173]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id b32si1596713ibq.1.2010.11.28.07.34.39; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:34:39 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.173 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.173; Received: by mail-iw0-f173.google.com with SMTP id 42so3655725iwn.18 for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:34:39 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.10.193 with SMTP id q1mr4154043ibq.70.1290958479395; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:34:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.199.206 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:34:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.199.206 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:34:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <659354.26852.qm@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 10:34:39 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Time for the perenial other-centric-.ui conversation From: Luke Bergen To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: lukeabergen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lukeabergen@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.173 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lukeabergen@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: multipart/alternative; boundary=0022152d60cd958ba004961eb1e7 --0022152d60cd958ba004961eb1e7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Ok, I see where you're going. So "oooo, that looked like it hurt" might become something like ".uu ta simlu lo ka cortu". I suppose. It's just unfortunate that there's this rich exclamation system that I can only use to indicate my own emotional state. But I guess it makes sense and I should stop trying to shoehorn .ui and friends into shortcuts for bridi that involve do.... or just say .uipeipaunai =p On Nov 28, 2010 10:01 AM, "Craig Daniel" wrote: > On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 11:58 PM, Luke Bergen wrote: >> So long as empathy doesn't require that I feel the actual emotion myself, >> I'm fine with that. I don't want to say .oidai and accidentally imply that >> I .oi > > I always understood it as expressing empathy with the perceived oi, > which can't possibly mean you feel oinai. There is absolutely a > difference between recognizing pain in somebody else and empathizing > with it! > > I'm sorta with JEC on this one, in that UI should be expressing your > emotion, but if da'oi is really just about expressing your empathy > with a specified person then it makes total sense to me. Some > da'oi-advocates seem to indicate that this is what it is - something > semantically equivalent to a way to specify the referent of dai > (although syntactically quite distinct); that seems useful. (Although > if it's in COI, doesn't it have the side effect of resetting the > referent of "do"?) Some seem to want it to mean "I believe so-and-so > feels the emotion indicated by saying whatever attitudinal (or, > apparently from some example sentences, string of attitudinals - > something dai cannot modify, because I can uedai after oiing or after > oidaiing*) and am not saying anything at all about my own emotional > state." In this case, you are stating apparent facts about the world, > not expressing your own feelings; statements of fact or belief like > that are what bridi are *for.* I'm against any experimental cmavo > whose advocates can't agree on what it means, because that kind of > imprecision is incompatible with what the non-experimental parts of > the language strive to be (although they have sometimes been every bit > as murky in their own way), so you can put me in the anti-da'oi bin > until you guys make up your mind. > > The notion that saying "no, da'oi shouldn't work like that even though > nothing else does" is telling you that there's no good way to say > "ooh, that must have hurt" in Lojban is just silly, because nobody but > you seems resistant to using the vast majority of the grammar in the > way it was intended - the "ooh" is an English UIesque interjection > about the *speaker's* emotion, and the rest of the sentence is a > declarative sentence and really ought to be translated as one. The > emotional gismu were created for a reason. > > That said (tangent warning!), I think there's quite a difference > between zo'o and u'idai. The "surprise!" of an unexpected party is > much more akin to the former, and is not empathizing with anything at > all. It is not a perceived emotion, but an intended one. If it is to > be expressed with a UI at all, and I'm not sure it needs to be, it's > definitely not one modified with dai (or da'oi, if that's a > specified-referent dai relative). > > Now, I can see the value of a possible experimental dai-alike for > intended emotions, such that u'iblah and zo'o are synonymous, and > ueblah conveys something like "this is said/done with the intent that > it will be surprising!" But such a hypothetical cmavo is not and > should not be confused with dai. If da'oi is a semantically dai-like > cmavo, then this hypothetical would probably quickly get a > corresponding experimental COI. And I'm not sure the dai-for-intent > cmavo is even remotely necessary - one could just as easily say "spaji > .ai" in the three syllables needed for any experimental cmavo not > starting with x, and use the observative "spaji" instead of "spaji > da'oi." > > - mi'e .kreig. > > * John: by "oiing" in this context I mean "expressing pain through > the use of zo oi" rather than "feeling pain"; it's an English > shorthand for "cusku lu .oi li'u" rather than for "cortu." > > -- > 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. > -- 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. --0022152d60cd958ba004961eb1e7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Ok, I see where you're going.=A0 So "oooo, that looked like it = hurt" might become something like ".uu ta simlu lo ka cortu"= .=A0 I suppose.=A0 It's just unfortunate that there's this rich exc= lamation system that I can only use to indicate my own emotional state.=A0 = But I guess it makes sense and I should stop trying to shoehorn .ui and fri= ends into shortcuts for bridi that involve do.... or just say .uipeipaunai = =3Dp

On Nov 28, 2010 10:01 AM, "Craig Daniel&quo= t; <craigbdaniel@gmail.com= > wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 11:58 PM, = Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.= com> wrote:
>> So long as empathy doesn't require that I feel the actual emot= ion myself,
>> I'm fine with that.=A0 I don't want to say = .oidai and accidentally imply that
>> I .oi
>
> I alw= ays understood it as expressing empathy with the perceived oi,
> which can't possibly mean you feel oinai. There is absolutely a> difference between recognizing pain in somebody else and empathizing<= br>> with it!
>
> I'm sorta with JEC on this one, in th= at UI should be expressing your
> emotion, but if da'oi is really just about expressing your empathy=
> with a specified person then it makes total sense to me. Some
&= gt; da'oi-advocates seem to indicate that this is what it is - somethin= g
> semantically equivalent to a way to specify the referent of dai
>= ; (although syntactically quite distinct); that seems useful. (Although
= > if it's in COI, doesn't it have the side effect of resetting t= he
> referent of "do"?) Some seem to want it to mean "I beli= eve so-and-so
> feels the emotion indicated by saying whatever attitu= dinal (or,
> apparently from some example sentences, string of attitu= dinals -
> something dai cannot modify, because I can uedai after oiing or after<= br>> oidaiing*) and am not saying anything at all about my own emotional=
> state." In this case, you are stating apparent facts about th= e world,
> not expressing your own feelings; statements of fact or belief like> that are what bridi are *for.* I'm against any experimental cmavo=
> whose advocates can't agree on what it means, because that kin= d of
> imprecision is incompatible with what the non-experimental parts of> the language strive to be (although they have sometimes been every bi= t
> as murky in their own way), so you can put me in the anti-da'= oi bin
> until you guys make up your mind.
>
> The notion that say= ing "no, da'oi shouldn't work like that even though
> no= thing else does" is telling you that there's no good way to say > "ooh, that must have hurt" in Lojban is just silly, because = nobody but
> you seems resistant to using the vast majority of the gr= ammar in the
> way it was intended - the "ooh" is an Englis= h UIesque interjection
> about the *speaker's* emotion, and the rest of the sentence is a> declarative sentence and really ought to be translated as one. The> emotional gismu were created for a reason.
>
> That sai= d (tangent warning!), I think there's quite a difference
> between zo'o and u'idai. The "surprise!" of an unexp= ected party is
> much more akin to the former, and is not empathizing= with anything at
> all. It is not a perceived emotion, but an intend= ed one. If it is to
> be expressed with a UI at all, and I'm not sure it needs to be, it= 's
> definitely not one modified with dai (or da'oi, if that&= #39;s a
> specified-referent dai relative).
>
> Now, I c= an see the value of a possible experimental dai-alike for
> intended emotions, such that u'iblah and zo'o are synonymous, = and
> ueblah conveys something like "this is said/done with the = intent that
> it will be surprising!" But such a hypothetical cm= avo is not and
> should not be confused with dai. If da'oi is a semantically dai-li= ke
> cmavo, then this hypothetical would probably quickly get a
&g= t; corresponding experimental COI. And I'm not sure the dai-for-intent<= br> > cmavo is even remotely necessary - one could just as easily say "= spaji
> .ai" in the three syllables needed for any experimental = cmavo not
> starting with x, and use the observative "spaji"= ; instead of "spaji
> da'oi."
>
> - mi'e .kreig.
>
>= * John: by "oiing" in this context I mean "expressing pain= through
> the use of zo oi" rather than "feeling pain"= ;; it's an English
> shorthand for "cusku lu .oi li'u" rather than for "= cortu."
>
> --
> 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=3Den.
>

--
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.
--0022152d60cd958ba004961eb1e7--