From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRC5icvnBBoEK-2zpA@googlegroups.com Sun Nov 28 13:08:27 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PMoTs-0000dd-Uj; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:08:26 -0800 Received: by wwb17 with SMTP id 17sf1232664wwb.16 for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:08:14 -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 :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=4OPfxIN1EIq8l5yQVL4YCvF0PYAJOIhDXCZNm+YnwLk=; b=yJHrsWn8Ux1xOpIPtCtuMFoS8/uINEsrEkzTsy50rmJ4uaI0NJSctbbfZ6wFufh12+ VTdyvXs8zJYs4JIiZVp6mh8ofAaRGfk1u4NgiEzXIO/dsildiKVfurdwqStuXJDdRXw8 oKNSON69q27M6IcpoSsoeMU0stYbVVDlnMoSc= 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=wYGMnNglNpe73VXZ/xfz17eu0zFJcIRbfepFyxlpZKkXYAD1G0VufghB4xgMMC6Edi lH2Ud3KpGK/eBrruedqzv4rY1073rhiLyObSGNr2nhyhKk97+aokfgHcv68JpGpUuMMf b3ZwIQbJg7WJqgpbR9Qyha+jg5z3453kmqumE= Received: by 10.216.159.205 with SMTP id s55mr1123749wek.12.1290978489140; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:08:09 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.227.41.197 with SMTP id p5ls1852879wbe.1.p; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:08:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.156.65 with SMTP id v1mr230167wbw.20.1290978487815; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:08:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.156.65 with SMTP id v1mr230166wbw.20.1290978487732; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:08:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wy0-f170.google.com (mail-wy0-f170.google.com [74.125.82.170]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id m15si656431wbg.5.2010.11.28.13.08.06; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:08:06 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.170; Received: by mail-wy0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 28so3638940wyf.1 for ; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:08:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.132.208 with SMTP id c16mr5114940wbt.25.1290978486518; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:08:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.138.16 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Nov 2010 13:08:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <659354.26852.qm@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 18:08:06 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [lojban] Time for the perenial other-centric-.ui conversation 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 74.125.82.170 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 On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Craig Daniel wrote: > (Although > if it's in COI, doesn't it have the side effect of resetting the > referent of "do"?) "mi'e" is in COI and does not have that effect. The reason to put "da'oi" in COI/DOI is because of its syntactic behaviour, not because of it's meaning. It clearly does not create a vocative like almost all the other COIs do. > 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). That's true. But human beings are imitative creatures, so a common way of inducing (or trying to induce) an emotion in someone is by expressing that emotion yourself. So while "u'i" and "zo'o" do have different definitions, their use is not that far appart, because you can't very credibly say that something is meant as humor but you are not amused, or express amusement and deny that you mean it to be humorous. Another similar case is (the way I use) ".o'i", which is not so much to express a feeling of caution as to induce that feeling in someone else, by the same mechanism of contagion. > 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. I don't see a need, because the distinction between ".u'i" and "zo'o", while understandable, has always seemed somewhat artificial. What does it mean when someone adds a smiley to something they write? That they find it amusing or that they want others to find it amusing? What does it mean when you say something with a smile? Is it really worth making such a subtle distinction? > 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." I will leave that to TV show scriptwriters (those surprise parties where the lights are suddenly turned on and everyone says "surprise!" only happen in TV shows, don't they?) For more natural scenarios, I think empathetic surprise works well. 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.