Re: [bpfk] The Case for UI.

["Adam D. Lopresto" <adam@pubcrawler.org>]

On Tue, 14 Sep 2010, Jorge Llambías wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 12:39 AM, Lindar <lindarthebard@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > The Case for UI.
> > (or ".AI KARAMBA")
>
> My initial reaction:
>
> 1- If you want to express an explicitly emotional attitude, you can
> always add the modifier "ro'i" to an attitudinal. Most attitudinals,
> even those of VV form, are not about expressing pure emotion.
>
> 2- Uttering a proposition is not equivalent to asserting it.
> Expressing an attitude about a proposition is not "changing" the
> proposition. For some weird reason, many people are convinced that the
> only use propositions have is for making assertions. It isn't. It is
> something of the default use, but nowhere near the only use. If you
> want to be explicit that you are making an assertion, you can indicate
> that with "ju'a".

+1

{ju'a} can be used to explicitly assert a propositon. {da'i} can be used to
explicitly override any realis interpretation another attitudinal would tend
to lend an utterence, and {da'i nai} can explicitly force a realis reading.
Other than that, context wins.

> 3- We should definitely assign some meaning to the gismu "ramba". Any
> suggestions?

Unfortunately it conflicts with {rambo}, and *I'm* not gonna be the one to
stand up to a shirtless Sly Stallone.
--
Adam Lopresto
http://cec.wustl.edu/~adam/

Red meat is NOT bad for you. Now, blue-green meat, that's REALLY BAD
for you.  --Tommy Smothers

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BPFK" group.
To post to this group, send email to bpfk-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bpfk-list+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bpfk-list?hl=en.