From lojban+bncCJ2UzZHuDRC41tbnBBoExgO3_A@googlegroups.com Tue Nov 30 17:56:25 2010 Received: from mail-ww0-f61.google.com ([74.125.82.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1PNbvf-0001vn-Nh; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:56:25 -0800 Received: by wwb17 with SMTP id 17sf3190905wwb.16 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:56:13 -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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=+2N27BL1JJcD/XzNTSw8ygld8iqA2IJWccX4WlTQHaI=; b=PrCDFKl8pcblLx0SLS75yghxeT9nt7xUDkdZe2xwQVqK2ZQfEaFkBFbzp2iB9Nk1O3 DxS1UlcSMETnJum33VH/Jw1+JOwgxJjTCKRjqlGY+Wa+y5rfV3qjkV5yTTVObeFilBgm D9XKUHAKCqyeWt3QEYuom29+3hfbYzWpaI6So= 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=VC4ChR3A8oC5ERQ1IUBKv7+HN/Zn1+Bn5wQiyJA4Pdt5j1XIX+E5FE4R6QHvFsDERW M5vys0IyyUdGpfJhFwNAJpMWAN0NWsf1GikD5v//IzklIWJTHGD63U92ruk90E5Dnt7v x8yYaWi++Asp1gYot4kfuy587QgSAQ6WjWAFI= Received: by 10.216.240.140 with SMTP id e12mr995518wer.15.1291168568436; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:56:08 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.216.246.70 with SMTP id p48ls2948437wer.1.p; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:56:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.55.208 with SMTP id k58mr84505wec.5.1291168567592; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:56:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.55.208 with SMTP id k58mr84503wec.5.1291168567575; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:56:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wy0-f179.google.com (mail-wy0-f179.google.com [74.125.82.179]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id y33si23858wbd.6.2010.11.30.17.56.06; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:56:06 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jjllambias@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.179 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.179; Received: by wyi11 with SMTP id 11so6394573wyi.10 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:56:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.127.134 with SMTP id g6mr8717293wbs.54.1291168565696; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:56:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.138.16 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:56:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <575924.12596.qm@web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <659354.26852.qm@web81304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <604115.16202.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <752705.36302.qm@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <822423.65423.qm@web81301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <605319.19000.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <433664.89554.qm@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <906301.34622.qm@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <306693.13766.qm@web81301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <164975.71420.qm@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <575924.12596.qm@web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 22:56:05 -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 74.125.82.179 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 Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 9:59 PM, John E Clifford wro= te: > > {The word (if you prefer that) I'd prefer "phrase", since it's two words, not one, but nevermind. You'll say I'm quibbling. > 'uinai' is composed of the word 'ui' , used to > express happiness, followed by the word 'nai', the polar negation; togeth= er they > used, unsurprisingly to express the polar negation of happiness. =A0Where= is the > problem with that? There is no problem with that. "ui" is used to express something and "uinai" is used to express something else. Those two things being expressed are related in a way indicated by "nai", but one of them is not part of the other in the way that the word "ui" is part of the phrase "uinai". >=A0The point is that it is still a first person word, Let's say that it is. Let's say that both "ui" and "uinai" are "first person words" or "first person phrases". Are you suggesting that there is a rule that a first person word cannot be transformed into a non-first person word or phrase (assuming that a question is not first person)? Where did that rule come from? Of course "pei" changes the type of speech act of the phrase it appears in, all Lojban question words do that. > it > expresses my sadness, whoever I may be in the situation, not yours or the= irs. Yes it does. > The fact that we happen to have word for the polar negation of happiness = is > irrelevant -- there several words in these sets where that is not true, b= ut the > forms work just the same.} I'm not the least bit concerned about the English translation. When a speaker says "uinai", they do not start by expressing happiness. When a speaker says "uipei", they do not start by expressing happiness. The type of speech act performed when saying "uinai" is the same type of speech act as when saying "ui", agreed. "nai" changes the meaning of the preceding word, (or more precisely creates a phrase with a meaning related to but distinct from the meaning of the preceding word) but the resulting phrase has the same speech act potential as the unmodified word. "pei", on the other hand, like all other question words, not only modifies the meaning of the preceding word (or creates a phrase, etc) in a regular way, but it also changes its illocutionary force. Nothing new or fancy about that. > {Faked obtuseness does not become you, but OK. =A0If the shift between wo= rd and > expression is puzzling, lets put it this way: 'uinai' is a word composed = of the > word 'ui', which is used by a person to express his happiness, and the wo= rd > 'nai', used to form the polar opposites of other words. =A0The result is = thus a > word 'uinai' which is to be used by a person to express the polar opposit= e of > happiness, sadness, as he is feeling it (putatively). Right. > 'uipei' is a word formed from 'ui' as above and 'pei' a word which asks a= bout a > voiced item of the right sort ('ui' is) what degree of the the emotion (e= tc.) is > intended. =A0Combined then it would seem to mean that the person uttering= it is > expressing merely an uncertainty about where on the scale from happiness = to > sadness his feeling lie. No, that's not what it means. It means that the person uttering it is asking their interlocutor to express where on that scale they are feeling like. But we've been over that already a dozen times. >=A0That seems a reasonable question ask sometimes, even > if rarely. =A0But that is not 'uipei' is reported to mean: it is expressi= ng > nothing and asking a second person to express (not state) where their fee= lings > lie on that scale Bingo! > -- even though that second person may have shown no > inclination to express anything at all on that scale. =A0What miracle mad= e this > transformation? The miracle of "pei". What miracle turns English "Yeah!" into "Yeah?" I guess it's the miracle of "?". Or maybe the miracle of intonation. Lojban usually substitutes words for intonantion. > {I know what it says*says*, but I also know what it usually means. =A0One= who asks > "Do you agree" is asking for a commitment, not genuinely asking a factual > question -- despite the form. =A0'ie' is thus even semantically acceptabl= e.} A: xu do tugni B: ie is exactly parallel to: A: xu do gleki B: ui I'm still somewhat surprised that you are so strongly defending the first while you would probably say that the second is riddled with confusion. 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.