From lojban-out@lojban.org Mon Aug 19 08:02:56 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_7_4); 19 Aug 2002 15:02:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 53199 invoked from network); 19 Aug 2002 15:02:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218) by m4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 19 Aug 2002 15:02:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 2002 15:02:49 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17go3N-0007cb-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 08:02:49 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17go2z-0007cJ-00; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 08:02:25 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 19 Aug 2002 08:02:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com ([66.68.125.184] ident=root) by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17go2o-0007cA-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 08:02:19 -0700 Received: from cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (asdf@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g7JF6iex029957 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 10:06:44 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from fracture@cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com) Received: (from fracture@localhost) by cs6668125-184.austin.rr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g7JF6i4h029956 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 19 Aug 2002 10:06:44 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 10:06:44 -0500 To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: Re: [lojban] .uanai ne'i le velcli Message-ID: <20020819150644.GA29865@allusion.net> References: <17a.d3e3a0c.2a924947@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17a.d3e3a0c.2a924947@aol.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-archive-position: 683 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: fracture@allusion.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list X-eGroups-From: Jordan DeLong From: Jordan DeLong Reply-To: fracture@allusion.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=116389790 X-Yahoo-Profile: lojban_out --9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 09:14:47AM -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 8/19/2002 5:49:13 AM Central Daylight Time,=20 > lojban-out@lojban.org writes: [...] > The question is, first, whether one is here *expressing* an obligation or= =20 > merely *reporting* that one has (or had) one. I think that {ei} only=20 > expresses and that this case is too deeply buried to be an expression, he= nce=20 > the need to state the obligation openly. Secondly, the question is wheth= er=20 [...] I had this same argument with xorxes already on jboste (bau la lojban. though so it wasn't quite this lame). Check CLL chapter 2, he's right -- certain attitudinals modify the meaning of the bridi instead of just expressing how you feel. ".ei" is one of the former. --=20 Jordan DeLong fracture@allusion.net --9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE9YQmDDrrilS51AZ8RAjU0AKCXoMI3Z/b2jCp4ifTi945yROE7kwCeLz7f h5S9qVjkLrYARnN9e2zZymI= =vRON -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR--