On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 09:56:53AM -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 10/7/2002 8:06:01 PM Central Daylight Time,
> lojban-out@lojban.org writes:
> <<
> > Ok; I agree that there is a gramatical difference, but not that
> > there is a real semantic difference (except perhaps in which part
> > of the claim is more important (the fact you are happy, or whatever
> > the other claim is))...
> >>
> Nope. {ui [bridi]} is true or false depending on [bridi], and goes the same
> way. If you are not, in fact, happy, you may be misleading but you haven't
> said anything false.
> {mi gleki lenu [bridi]} is true or false depending upon your attitude (happy
> or not) about the event of [bridi]. Typically, it would also be false if
> that event did not occur, but this is deputable. But certainly the mere fact
> that the event did occur would not make {mi gleki...} true.
It wouldn't be false if the event didn't occur because it uses "le".
I agree that the "pure emotion indicators" don't affect truth value...
This does *not* count as a real semantic difference. If this is
all you have, I don't see how you are justifed in calling it the
"original malglico".
--
Jordan DeLong - fracture@allusion.net
lu zo'o loi censa bakni cu terzba le zaltapla poi xagrai li'u
sei la mark. tuen. cusku
Attachment:
pgp00167.pgp
Description: PGP signature