From cowan@ccil.org Sat May 27 12:08:24 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7958 invoked from network); 27 May 2000 19:08:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by m3.onelist.org with QMQP; 27 May 2000 19:08:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO locke.ccil.org) (192.190.237.102) by mta3 with SMTP; 27 May 2000 19:08:22 -0000 Received: (from cowan@localhost) by locke.ccil.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA13018 for lojban@onelist.com; Sat, 27 May 2000 15:32:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200005271932.PAA13018@locke.ccil.org> Subject: Re: [lojban] coi rodo - mi'e .aulun. To: lojban@egroups.com Date: Sat, 27 May 100 15:32:22 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20000527185907.91179.qmail@hotmail.com> from "Jorge Llambias" at May 27, 0 11:59:07 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-eGroups-From: John Cowan From: John Cowan Jorge Llambias scripsit: > I missed in Lojban an evidential question. I think that > better than using {djuno} to translate his "how do you > know?" would be to use "in what evidential mode are you > talking?", but there isn't one. {ge'epei} sounds more > like a therapist: "and how do you feel about that?" "ju'a" was invented partly for this purpose. It is the vague evidential, so "ju'apei" is the natural evidential question. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org Yes, I know the message date is bogus. I can't help it. --me, on far too many occasions