From pycyn@aol.com Wed Oct 09 07:01:46 2002
Return-Path: <Pycyn@aol.com>
X-Sender: Pycyn@aol.com
X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_2_0); 9 Oct 2002 14:01:45 -0000
Received: (qmail 20344 invoked from network); 9 Oct 2002 14:01:45 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216)
  by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 9 Oct 2002 14:01:45 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO imo-r08.mx.aol.com) (152.163.225.104)
  by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 9 Oct 2002 14:01:45 -0000
Received: from Pycyn@aol.com
  by imo-r08.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id r.9c.27852ef4 (4529)
  for <lojban@yahoogroups.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2002 10:01:37 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <9c.27852ef4.2ad590c1@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 10:01:37 EDT
Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: a new kind of fundamentalism
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_9c.27852ef4.2ad590c1_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509
From: pycyn@aol.com
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=2455001
X-Yahoo-Profile: kaliputra

--part1_9c.27852ef4.2ad590c1_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 10/8/2002 9:55:41 PM Central Daylight Time, 
a.rosta@lycos.co.uk writes:

<<
> Jordan:
> > I mean that they *mean* the same things. "Semantic difference" as
> > you're thinking of it, sure. But "gleki leza'i broda" and ".ui
> > broda" *mean* the same thing in a real conversation (or at least
> > they would most of the time).
> 
> You mean that even though the sentences have different truthconditional
> meaning, speakers will generally intend to communicate the same
> information when uttering them.
>>
Thanks for answering my next question before I got around to asking it; I'm 
sure you are right -- on the reading of Jordan, though less so on the reading 
of Lojban. The English muddle -- frequently acknowledged -- is an *English* 
(maybe even an SAE) muddle; it need not be a Lojban one. And Lojban is 
described to stop it being a Lojban one; let's go with that. So far as I can 
tell, Lojban does not allow, for example, a question to be directive other 
than to an answer. So the "Yes/ No" response to "May I have the sugar?," 
which is either witty or rude in English, is merely correct in Lojban for the 
direct Lojban translation {xu mi pilno le sakta}, and cannot arise for the 
more sensitive translation {e'o mi pilno le sakta}, which gets {ai[nai]}, not 
{[na]go'i}. Admittedly, {ai[nai]} is also a reading of "Yes/No" but not the 
one intended in the "joke." Similar differences might be maintained for 
attitudinals, I should hope.

--part1_9c.27852ef4.2ad590c1_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"><FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2>In a message dated 10/8/2002 9:55:41 PM Central Daylight Time, a.rosta@lycos.co.uk writes:<BR>
<BR>
&lt;&lt;<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Jordan:<BR>
&gt; I mean that they *mean* the same things.&nbsp; "Semantic difference" as<BR>
&gt; you're thinking of it, sure.&nbsp; But "gleki leza'i broda" and ".ui<BR>
&gt; broda" *mean* the same thing in a real conversation (or at least<BR>
&gt; they would most of the time).<BR>
<BR>
You mean that even though the sentences have different truthconditional<BR>
meaning, speakers will generally intend to communicate the same<BR>
information when uttering them.</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
&gt;&gt;<BR>
Thanks for answering my next question before I got around to asking it; I'm sure you are right -- on the reading of Jordan, though less so on the reading of Lojban.&nbsp; The English muddle -- frequently acknowledged -- is an *English* (maybe even an SAE) muddle; it need not be a Lojban one.&nbsp; And Lojban is described to stop it being a Lojban one; let's go with that.&nbsp; So far as I can tell, Lojban does not allow, for example, a question to be directive other than to an answer.&nbsp; So the "Yes/ No" response to "May I have the sugar?,"&nbsp; which is either witty or rude in English, is merely correct in Lojban for the direct Lojban translation {xu mi pilno le sakta}, and cannot arise for the more sensitive translation {e'o mi pilno le sakta}, which gets {ai[nai]}, not {[na]go'i}.&nbsp; Admittedly, {ai[nai]} is also a reading of "Yes/No" but not the one intended in the "joke."&nbsp; Similar differences might be maintained for attitudinals, I should hope.</FONT></HTML>

--part1_9c.27852ef4.2ad590c1_boundary--

