On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Craig Daniel
<craigbdaniel@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Michael Turniansky
<
mturniansky@gmail.com> wrote:
> We seem to be in agreement here. Who wants in "au se'inai"? *I* do.
> What's the reason for my want? Someone else. Who complains in "oi
> se'inai"? I do. What's the reason for my complaint? Someone else. Hence,
> "That fall you took hurt me!" Whereas "oi dai" to me only conveys "I see
> that YOU hurt".
is one of empathetic pain, and implies that the speaker feels pain on
behalf of the listener (whether or not the listener actually feels any
pain).
This is important, because the UI (other than xu) are strangely
non-declarative. There is a crucial difference between ".ui" and "mi
gleki". You might be lying about how you feel, so "mi gleki" is simply
false; ".ui" has no truth value, ever. It cannot be affirmed, obeyed,
or answered, as it is not semantically declarative, imperative, or
interrogative. Since I can very readily be mistaken about how you
feel, saying ".oi" on your behalf makes no sense - it's expressing
something that I have no way of knowing even exists, without allowing
you to dispute it. An empathetic feeling, on the other hand, is no
less real just because the person being empathized with feels
differently; that's the kind of feeling ".oidai" expresses.
But I never asserted that "oidai" declares or (as you use later), "asserts". I said it CONVEYS that meaning.
In fact, now that I have just reread the lojban reference grammar, that's EXACTLY the example they give. (13.10.9) and then goes on to say, "Both ``pei'' and ``dai'' represent exceptions to the normal rule that attitudinals reflect the speaker's attitude."
I didn't THINK I was making this up.
--gejyspa