| In a message dated 6/14/2001 6:30:41 PM Central Daylight Time,
lojbab@lojban.org writes: >.a'unaicai pe'idai le nu fanva la .alis. cu palci .ianai .u'e > Back to the beginning then. I would like to point out that I understood from the beginning what xod meant to say and my point was -- and still is -- that he failed to say it. None of the attitudinals involved are problematic in the sense of changing the truth value of the claim, which remains that translating Alice is evil. xod expresses strong repulsion for this situation, disbelief in it and wonder at it. He also gives as his support for the claim that I (or someone unspecified) think it. But he still asserts it. Nor would his repulsion, wonder or disbelief make sense if the claim were not true. None of the proposals so far offered have changed that, although some may appear to, but involve such contradictory elements as to cancel that appearance. I suspect that xod meant either to assert that he was disbelieving, repulsed, and wondering that *I* made this claim (which I did not and so his emotions were misplaced) or to express or assert that the words themselves willed him with ... Since he wrote his usual sloppy sentences, we do not yet know which it was, nor has the subsequent discussion shed any light on *that* matter (but a little light and a lot of darkness on attitudinals). |