Re: [lojban] Time for the perenial other-centric-.ui conversation

[John E Clifford <kali9putra@yahoo.com>]

No, UI, properly used, was a great idea (I'm not too sure about some of the 
Lojban elaborations, but the idea is still excellent).  It allows us to make 
distinctions that are impossible in English (well, very hard, any how).  Take an 
English sentence (I think this works for most naturla languages in the case of 
at least some emotions) "I am sorry I spilled the drink".  Assuming for the 
moment that I did spill the drink (what happens if I didn't goes off in into 
philosophical cloud-cuckoo-land), this sentences has two different uses.  On is 
a *report* about how I feel -- it may be true or false, depending upon whether I 
really do feel sorry.  The other is an *expression* of my regret.  the latter is 
neither true nor false (though it may be sincere or not); it has the same 
logical force as "Oops."
As for the difference between saying that someone else has an emotion (that I do 
not share empathetically) and .... what?  It can't be expressing an emotion 
since, by the assumption, I don't feel it, and have no reason to fake it (and 
with love, for example, good reasons not to around her bruiser boyfriend).  




----- Original Message ----
From: Remo Dentato <rdentato@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, November 27, 2010 3:40:38 PM
Subject: Re: [lojban] Time for the perenial other-centric-.ui conversation

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 10:24 PM, Luke Bergen <lukeabergen@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, from vlasisku I thought that the /preceding/ UI was what was dai'ed to
> the DOIed person.  E.g. "mi viska do .ue da'oi la .remo." for "I see you
> aren't you surprised la remo" vs "mi viska do .ue doi la .remo."  -> "I see
> you (surprised that it's /you/), remo"

Well, vlasisku just says that {da'oi} assigns UI to someone else than
the speaker and it is part of the DOI selma'o. So my understanding is
that like {doi} sets who the listener is, {da'oi} sets who the
"feeler" is. Then the UI of that sentence are tied to the preceding
sumti.

John, UI and brivla are not substitutes one of the other. If I use a
UI to express an emotion is to convey something different than just
"sayng" that the emotion is felt.

If in a natural language I would say something like "I love Alice" I
would translate with "mi prami la .alis." but if I would say "Oh! How
I love Alice!" I would render it with "mi la ,alis..au prami". I might
get it wrong but it seems to me that you consider UI as a bad idea.

.remod.

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


      

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