Subject: [lojban] Re: cmavo for emphasis?

From: "And Rosta" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 01:19:22 +0100

Jay:
[...]
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 06:01:01PM +0100, And Rosta wrote:
> > #Users won't understand it because it is bloody well wrong, as you've
> > #now noticed.
> > 
> > Do people say "bloody well wrong" in Colorado? It sounds very British
> > to my ears.
> 
> Nope, just me. It is, here, at least, considered less invective, and
> more acceptable than something like "fucking". Sorry if thats the
> opposite case elsewhere. I ought to be a bit more careful.

No, "bloody well" is merely vehement, not rude. I was just curious
about the dialectal point. You needn't be careful with me -- when
Chris Double was subscribed from his work account that had the
anti porn filters, it was brought home to me how often I unwittingly
employed the f-word in my postings (-- just because I write as I
speak). Interestingly someone took the trouble to edit such a
casual f-word out of my wiki page the other day; perhaps it is only
British sensibilities that are inured to it.

> > Anyway, did you not read what I wrote? Viktor's examples suggested
> > he was asking about focus, and what I originally said was wrong in
> > applying to emphasis, but relatively right in applying to focus.
> 
> Sure, I'm not saying anything one way or the other about focus. But
> I was responding on emphasis from the start, and I personally thought
> it was quite clear exactly what he was asking for. If you thought he
> meant focus, well, I can understand why you suggested something different.
> Anything I said about your rightness or wrongness was entirely in the
> scope of whether or not it worked for emphasis. (Except the missing 
> 'cu's. :)

Does "broda du" parse as a tanru?

> > But that still doesn't mean that users will understand it, because
> > the users are not very competent in Lojban.
> 
> Oh, you'd be surprised.

It would be nice if I were. But I expressed myself too crudely. I
gather that thanks to industry & application, the abilities of some
Lojbanists to converse in Lojban are progressing by leaps and
bounds. So by certain measures, the general level of competence is 
greatly increasing. What I had in mind was the competence to
express yourself in Lojban so that the meaning encoded by your
sentences matches the meaning you intended to express linguistically;
it's that competence that I feel remains underdeveloped in the
community. That's not to say I think it isn't gradually developing,
though. 

--And.