Re: [lojban] Are attitudinals assertions? (was: Attitudinals again (was: Sapi...

[pycyn@aol.com]

In a message dated 6/16/2001 6:59:14 PM Central Daylight Time,
rob@twcny.rr.com writes:

When discussing attitudinals in English, it seems wrong that some turn an
assertion into something else, and some don't. However, when you look at the
corresponding bridi, some turn an assertion into something else, and some
don't.
Thus having "a'o" and such be translated into English differently is
because of
something that would seem perfectly natural to someone who spoke entirely in
Lojban.

I am not sure that I follow.  If I say {mi pacna lenu ko'a klama}, this is an
assertion, while {a'o ko'a klama} is not.  Is it the {ko'a klama} that you
are talking about? It is not asserted in either case.  But, alas, it is also
not asserted in the case of {mi gleki lenu ko'a klama}, though it is
presupposed in this case and not in the {pacna} case -- {lenu} clauses aren't
asserted anywhere.  So, maybe what you mean is that some attitude brivla form
sentences with {lenu} clauses which presuppose the truth of the enclaused
bridi and some don't.  But that will not quite get the distinction, since,
for example, {krici} does not presuppose the truth of its enclaused bridi but
the corresponding attitudinal does combine to make an assertion of that bridi.