From lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRDt09_nBBoE6c3EKQ@googlegroups.com Thu Dec 02 10:48:27 2010 Received: from mail-gw0-f61.google.com ([74.125.83.61]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1POECd-0004Jn-8W; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 10:48:26 -0800 Received: by gwj17 with SMTP id 17sf4078563gwj.16 for ; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 10:48:17 -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:message-id:x-ymail-osg:received :x-mailer:references:date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version :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=RW8hO6goFSyKWJPEhUxuavANJkQf21LOoVyVWR3aA40=; b=gY5rlKESLL1TOyRQqyScHVvDKBB9FOukghkBdW/XngA1+4SP6nZ2RiYsZfLXjQr5kP noBk6CCAL6Hmx4xOB3uGw1OvUFaySftog5OVIEbLqTVX+Ilo9s0VRIJG63FqeUivUp8Q nDjUna3NV1UlpcdMap12epLyS/jwUOlwvK7mg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:message-id:x-ymail-osg:x-mailer:references :date:from:subject:to:in-reply-to:mime-version: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=GpHCPGt+Mg2Y3mddJLMTNrcBupOFZUlIH4KfrzMht3XTNZ0cZH34EaIDZEXvmdH+QH M4JgQ/DUiT5TwbIyyNyliDCQgUDhpchFPcAA9syBnFYEF35VCK/RhbBeWnvHYFXN1NOV 3jiKtOhkwmJLgysVA4ODBwi/9ZVJVeaZRPXrs= Received: by 10.150.4.36 with SMTP id 36mr125689ybd.47.1291315693027; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 10:48:13 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.151.135.18 with SMTP id m18ls5315205ybn.1.p; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 10:48:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.151.10.19 with SMTP id n19mr282421ybi.10.1291315691779; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 10:48:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.151.10.19 with SMTP id n19mr282420ybi.10.1291315691741; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 10:48:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.199.124]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id w9si179061ybe.1.2010.12.02.10.48.10; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 10:48:10 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.124 as permitted sender) client-ip=68.142.199.124; Received: (qmail 57873 invoked by uid 60001); 2 Dec 2010 18:48:10 -0000 Message-ID: <212334.57140.qm@web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: CIYXCqMVM1l49QhRro5yFI6psWyu7EK1JgXYJcl69cWb6VV g0PGK.PZ9jdewHfpwmaMwEThz4OTRRZb.5Rn8ToaQMBNd1Q20r4Q_P1vLmL2 .SvHMIoq0b6Ub96ke_m4JB61YPVyKn9L62vNMTn8CNjErpGvW_JvwETE7r0U lwCOHWlQXQ4yBv59GngqCKN8yyMZox_ZbMP9HRVS6V_2OtzlHmAq.TuzQGL_ W3PiiS98BhRvgS5M0uRgqelDEo.rJuGNQ_qkw70bugDnc031g9Dvtcj3R90P IxtXBy5fVIpPeasXtDb_8JI1QzbLJKh1..X3GWE7XZFgO2uqLRbNdmrrYK1k 9RVxxxDMb9ffnJcJ8oYpAAp.RiZmFRg-- Received: from [99.92.110.13] by web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 10:48:10 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/553 YahooMailWebService/0.8.107.285259 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> <144450.19864.qm@web81308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <132939.86626.qm@web81302.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <886986.39526.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <476795.46183.qm@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <435142.54831.qm@web81306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <194237.46033.qm@web81307.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <944795.22261.qm@web81305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 10:48:10 -0800 (PST) From: John E Clifford Subject: Re: [lojban] Time for the perenial other-centric-.ui conversation To: lojban@googlegroups.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Sender: kali9putra@yahoo.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 68.142.199.124 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kali9putra@yahoo.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header.i=@yahoo.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 Probably 'da'oi' since that is what I thought we were taking as a base, but= =20 someone used it to impute emotions to others without any empathizing on the= =20 speaker's part. So I said I was OK with that under certain conditions (I r= eally=20 don't like any of this, but I suppose the language evolves and theory needs= to=20 keep up). As for 'ie' as an answer to 'xu do tugni', 'ie' is in that puzzl= e=20 pile: as you noted, it seems a wrong answer when asked to agree about somet= hing=20 but I think it is a good answer when asked to agree to something. But (and= here=20 may be the problem, rather than with 'ie') 'tugni' seems to be only about= =20 agreeing that. Even so, 'ie' is not a totally bad answer, since one is ask= ed=20 agree about something almost entirely in conflict situations, so that agree= ing=20 that can be taken as agreeing to the program of one side, or at least agree= ing=20 with that side to that extent, and so being at least a partial partisan. ----- Original Message ---- From: Jorge Llamb=EDas To: lojban@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, December 2, 2010 12:10:00 PM Subject: Re: [lojban] Time for the perenial other-centric-.ui conversation On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Craig Daniel wrote= : > > John Clifford's argument (with which I basically am in agreement) is > that, to be in keeping with the stated design principles underlying > Lojban (and inherited from and in this instance I believe more > strongly present in Loglan), non-logical structures cannot be used to > express propositions. And I think most of us agree with that. (Although his suggestion that "ie" would be a natural response to "xu do tugni" still has me somewhat baffled.) > However, I can see no easy way to define "da'ai" such that it does not > contain anything propositional, What is "da'ai"? If you mean "da'oi", which is just like "dai" only it allows you to also indicate who you're empathizing with, I don't see anything propositional in it. mu'o mi'e xorxes --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups= =20 "lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to=20 lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at=20 http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=3Den. =20 --=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.