From: Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>
To: lojban@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: [lojban] {.au}/{djica}={.ai}/{?}. No gismu for intention
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 12:36 AM, John E Clifford <
kali9putra@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I think saying that a bridi marked by {ca'e} is true is a dangerous move to
> make, though I can the reasoning behind it.
Apparently that's Searle's position on performatives while Austin's is
the one you prefer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performative_utterance
"John R. Searle argued in his 1989 article How Performatives Work that
performatives are true/false just like constatives. Searle further
claimed that performatives are what he calls declarations; this is a
technical notion of Searle's account: according to his conception, an
utterance is a declaration, if "the successful performance of the
speech act is sufficient to bring about the fit between words and
world, to make the propositional content true." Searle believes that
this
double direction of fit contrasts the simple word-to-world fit of
assertives."
> (or whatever -- I like 'simxu speni'
> and wish we had something as graceful in English
I don't find it graceful at all, it makes me want to ask "simxu speni
ma", "mutually married to whom?". It should be either "simxu lo ka
speni" or eventually "speni simxu", but not "simxu speni".)
mu'o mi'e xorxes
--
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.