From lojban+bncCIywt_XDCRCBjInxBBoEFSDw8g@googlegroups.com Sat Jul 16 19:16:45 2011 Received: from mail-gy0-f189.google.com ([209.85.160.189]) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QiGuR-00059L-RF; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:16:45 -0700 Received: by gyg4 with SMTP id 4sf2657079gyg.16 for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:16:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=beta; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:x-yahoo-newman-property:x-ymail-osg :x-yahoo-smtp:references:in-reply-to :x-apple-yahoo-original-message-folder:mime-version:message-id :x-mailer:from:x-apple-yahoo-replied-msgid:subject:date:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post :list-help:list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=CtbOGuz095Vv0N3E4tueJIZY4MXSyo02jB0eyLyu3Oo=; b=ETWeV89jUNjrbA993weSx33cwmBILo2yQUWVDynmR4xiTUs+2X5CFRoYIe42ihfOvp nIhOF+G1o8PC+XL9y0eIsB7ehqJNUFHN7InxxkYlGWkCwpIVECf/1ORa/m4GIaZ7NwcL +E/uju2mgK6++y1k/pf5ygqUy2HfzAuJFyfVk= Received: by 10.150.190.12 with SMTP id n12mr801501ybf.31.1310868993092; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:16:33 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.231.200.104 with SMTP id ev40ls1118924ibb.0.gmail; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:16:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.82.8 with SMTP id b8mr1718246icl.104.1310868992226; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:16:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.82.8 with SMTP id b8mr1718245icl.104.1310868992218; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:16:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp101-mob.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (smtp101-mob.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.88.34]) by gmr-mx.google.com with SMTP id k1si1476474icn.4.2011.07.16.19.16.30; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 19:16:31 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of kali9putra@yahoo.com designates 98.138.88.34 as permitted sender) client-ip=98.138.88.34; Received: (qmail 18609 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2011 02:16:30 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: ZKw36T0VM1mEAnWNyRFRWI9SjwNuB0KEvlkmPB.Z.ZM.CVk zCXsjh1ydiyEWesw0d8mHiZYZg96.TozYBwXWTvLUPB39jdB00lNxz2sSBUo ABeG27yynXrVCvwYFpWocl_sMmcUUus2KQDSBpQcfhPuMZ9OH6WSD56P7xw9 448B3pbbZJUTjF.5M8X.qW8HZLFoAcbxtVNFvsAZ6BR.g7fnSI6b_4yoPruI AnQs.TF5ATws0qg8_5yxX49e2gGTO3hXxafyes7VLpn2Lc7KTWLHkEZnmpSv Y55xX6SD1zMMd2tWtkQ_TUfKSMQqpm72ie5H3fjbvxkBq.BgIRS2W60MFWbu u.RRJlaJBJDy3BxpiZ8plORuQ28sduPy7mjUhLZpS.Ig1MgpZtaDdF9LXnt0 nKBd_GV6U0DphHhQbWQ6UayNg4x2EK8B52EroFmboQFr_Dl89dTM- X-Yahoo-SMTP: xvGyF4GswBCIFKGaxf5wSjlg3RF108g- Received: from [192.168.1.68] (kali9putra@99.92.108.41 with xymcookie) by smtp101-mob.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 16 Jul 2011 19:16:29 -0700 PDT References: <1310834449.33385.YahooMailRC@web81301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <380A4C35-EF1C-4F52-ADBF-324B57D9DDEF@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <380A4C35-EF1C-4F52-ADBF-324B57D9DDEF@yahoo.com> X-Apple-Yahoo-Original-Message-Folder: Inbox Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPad Mail 8G4) Message-Id: <18474939-CD0B-42BE-81A9-63C3018B6169@yahoo.com> X-Mailer: iPad Mail (8G4) From: "John E. Clifford" X-Apple-Yahoo-Replied-Msgid: 1_1501758_AHfHjkQAAJZUTiIT/gqiZkXAYks Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: xu dai Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 22:23:10 -0400 To: "lojban@googlegroups.com" 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 98.138.88.34 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: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 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 Some how this seems to have gone astray. Sent from my iPad On Jul 16, 2011, at 18:49, "John E. Clifford" wrote: > We comeback to the question of Lojban being a logical language and what t= hat means. While I think we have wandered unconsciously pretty far from th= e original meaning, I don't see any reason to deliberately and consciously = do so. And one part of all that is to keep one grammatical distinction ove= rt (or at least clearly marked). Now it would be a possible one -- but one= uniting slippage, I think, to allow that for certain predicate in certain = contexts, when unmarked, to indicate a different speech act from the usual = one (informative). We do it all the time in English, of course, and it cre= ates countless problems for logical analysis. Better to stick to the simpl= e rule, hard though it seems to be for people to grasp or follow (why pursu= e a language which is supposed to change the way you think and then changes= it back so that it works like one you already have?) > Did I really describe a generalization for 'dai'? Other than to point ou= t how ridiculous it was for any serious purpose (I have a logician's contem= pt for rhetoric)? 'e'u dai do klama' is a suggestion, if at all, that I am= making (no one else has said it) and trying to pass the blame to someone e= lse is mere chicanery. In particular, your suggesting that you come seems = inherently a vapid speech act, unless you sense an objection to it. So, my= making the suggestion that you come but projecting it on you is either to = state those objections or to rebut them. But, as with the question case, i= t is ultimately my speech act, not yours (not even one you intended, if the= question cases are anything to go by). > Sent from my iPad >=20 > On Jul 16, 2011, at 15:46, Jorge Llamb=EDas wrote: >=20 >> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 1:40 PM, John E Clifford = wrote: >>> Not sure whether this is terminological or conceptual, but things don't= square >>> up with my understanding. 'mi stidi lo nu do klama' and 'e'u do klama'= are not >>> equally Informative speech acts, since 'e'u' makes the following senten= ce not >>> informative but a suggestion, a Directive speech act. >>=20 >> Part of the problem here seems to be that we are comparing apples with o= ranges. >>=20 >> "e'u do klama" is indeed a suggestion, but we can't be sure whether >> "mi stidi lo nu do klama" is an assertion or something else, since it >> doesn't have an explicit speech act marker. Granted that we do usually >> take sentences that are unmarked for speech act to be assertions, but >> context and content may suggest otherwise. "ju'a mi stidi lo nu do >> klama" is an assertion, but "ca'e mi stidi lo nu do klama", "I hereby >> suggest that you go" I would say is closer to a suggestion than to an >> assertion. (What is it? A "declaration"?) So while it's true that >> "ju'a" is the most common speech act indicator assumed in the absence >> of an explicit one, I suspect that for some type of predicates in the >> first person present (like mi stidi) something like "ca'e" is more >> often the intended speech act, >>=20 >>> Neither of these is, by the way, Expressive of anything. >>> The function of Expressive speech acts is to express feeling and the li= ke. But, >>> just as one can misinform using an Informative speech act, one can simu= late a >>> feeling one does not have in an Expressive speech act. The syntactical >>> legitimacy of the form does not rely on its accuracy. >>> I find the notion that asking a question is Expressive a little hard to= follow: >>> what is it expressing? >>=20 >> I agree that a question is not an expressive speech act. >>=20 >> What I don't share is your implied hypothesis that "dai" only makes >> sense as a modifier of expressive speech acts. It has an obvious >> generalization to other types of speech acts, one that you described >> yourself, so what is it that you find problematic about it? It simply >> indicates that the speaker is performing a given speech act putting >> themselves in the shoes of someone else. Why restrict its scope to >> expressive speech acts only? >>=20 >> mu'o mi'e xorxes >>=20 >> --=20 >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s "lojban" group. >> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googleg= roups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/loj= ban?hl=3Den. >>=20 >=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@googlegr= oups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojb= an?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.