Re: [lojban] Are attitudinals assertions? (was: Attitudinals again (was: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

[Anthony Roach <anthony@electriceyeball.com>]

On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 03:37:16PM +0000, Jorge Llambias wrote:
> 
> la xod cusku di'e
> 
> > > Is a smile an assertion to you?
> >
> >Isn't it? If not, why not?
> 
> No, because there is no proposition involved.
> 
> >How are you defining "assertion"?
> 
> The act of indicating that a given proposition is true.
> How do you define it?
> 
> mu'o mi'e xorxes

I'm new to this list, I don't know much Lojban, and I've never been
formally introduced to you all (Hi!), but I think I have idea on how to
clarify this for xod and others:

This is an assertion: "I am smiling".
This is not an assertion: ":-)"

The former is asserting something about myself, and the later is just me
smiling. If you say that the latter is asserting "I am smiling", then you must
concede that the former is asserting "I am asserting that I am smiling", which
it clearly isn't. I could say "I am asserting that I am smiling", and it
would be true, but that is not what the statment "I am smiling" is
asserting. 

"I am smiling." and ":-)" are on two different levels. The former is an
assertion that involves the later (i.e. my smile). 

The same discussion can be applied to "mi gleki" and ".ui". The former
asserts that I am happy, and the later conveyes my happiness to you in a
textual form. (I don't know enough Lojban to be sure, but I think that "mi
gleki" <=> "I am happy", right?)

This is all pretty subtle, and in actual practice I doubt it makes much
different, but there are situations where it does make a difference. Here
is an example: 

Me: I am smiling because I won the lottery today.
You: You're lying! (You aren't smiling.)

Me: :-) I won the lottery today.
You: You're lying! (You didn't win the lottery today.)

The statements in parenthesis are what most people would think you are are
claiming that I am lying about. Most people would not claim that in the
later you are saying that I am not really smiling. 

Anyway, I think it's great that Lojban has attitudinals so we don't have to
use things like ":-)" and ">:-|" to convey emotions in written or spoken
communication, and if we turn the attitudinals into assertions, then what's
the point of even having them? Attitudinals are a nice spice :-P to liven up a
boring dry assertions :-D.

-Anthony

P.S. I appologize for not using more Lojban in this message. I've only been
learning Lojban for a couple days now.

-- 
homepage: http:://www.electriceyeball.com
email: aroach@electriceyeball.com
PGP: http://www.electriceyeball.com/aroach.asc